UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

**NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING**

**PUBLIC MEETING ON TELEVISION SETS**

U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, D.C. 20585 Room 8 E

- 089 Review Center

Thur sday March 22 , 2012

**Facilitator:**

Doug Brookman Public Solutions Baltimore, MDExecutive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 2 **Participants Identified:**

Bill Schindler Panasonic Corporation

Matt Malinowski ICEF International

Bijit Kundu Energy Solutions

Adam Goldberg Mitsubishi

Jon Fairhurst Sharp Labs of America

Charlie Stephens Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

Mark Sharp Panasonic

Adam Christiansen Appliance Standards Awareness Project

Julia Farber Underwriters Laboratory

Verna Rodulovis EPA

**Participants from DOE:**Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 3

Vic Petrolati

Brenda Edwards

Simone Sydnor

Celia Sher General Counsel’s Office

**Participants from Consultants:**

Allen Tsao Navigant Consulting

Chris Yoder Navigant Consulting

Louis

- Benoit Desroches Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Mia Forbes Pirie Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Chris Calwell Ecova

**Presenters:**

Christopher Yoder Navigant Consulting

Anthony Rotolo Navigant Consulting

Louis

- Benoit Desroches Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Mia Forbes Pirie Lawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryExecutive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 4 **AGENDA**

**ITEM PAGE** 

Welcome, Doug Brookman 6

Welcome for DOE , Mr. Petrolati 6

Introductions 7

Agenda Review , Doug Brookman 9

Rulemaking Overview, Mr. Petrolati 11

Opening Remarks 13

Rulemaking History and Timeline 15 Mr. Petrolati

Test Procedure Overview, Mr. Yoder 21

Scope and Definitions, Mr. Yoder 22

Testing Conditions and Instrumentation Mr. Rotolo 28

On, Standby and Off Modes, Mr. Rotolo, Mr. Desroches 60

3D Overview and Testing, Ms. Forbes Pirie 135

Energy Efficiency and Metrics, Mr. Yoder 212

Energy Metrics, Mr. Desroches 216Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 5

P R O C E E D I N G S 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Good morning every one

. 2

W elcome . This is the U.S. Department of Energy’s 3

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking public meeting on 4

television sets. Today is Thur sday, March 22 , 2012, 5

here at the Forestall Building . Thanks to all of 6

you for being here . We’re going to start off this 7

morning with welcoming re marks from Vic Petrolati

. 8

**Welcoming Remarks** 9

MR. PETROLATI: All right. Good morning. 10

My name’s Vic Petrolati . I’m with the Department of 11

Energy. I’m the program manager for televisions. 12

I’d like to welcome you here to Washington, D.C. 13

to day . We p icked an excellent time of the year, of 14

course, for this TV test procedure public meeting. 15

The cherry blossoms are blooming out there. The 16

Washington Capitals are off to a playoff drive. 17

There’s some political controversy, I think, in the 18

town, and we’r e just hoping it doesn’t spread over 19

to this meeting today. So first of all, I want to 20

thank all of you for coming. We’re looking forward 21

to a good meeting. At this point we are planning on 22Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 6 meeting from nine to five. We are certainly hopeful 1

that we ca n address all your questions during this 2

period of time and look forward to working with you. 3

Doug, let me turn it back to you. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. It’s our 5

tradition to do introductions around the room

. 6

I’m going to start over here . If you’ll say your 7

n ame and organizational affiliation. You can get 8

used to turning these microphones on and off. 9

**Introductions** 10

MR. SCHINDLER : Good morning. I’m Bill 11

Schind ler, and I’m representing Panasonic 12

Corporation

. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 14

MR. MALINOWSKI: Hi. I’m Matt Malinowski , 15

ICEF International, consultant to EPA Energy Star 16

Program. 17

MR. KUNDU : Bijit Kundu with Energy 18

Solutions on behalf of the California investor

- owned 19

utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric, Southern 20

California Ediso n, and Semper Utilities. 21

MR. GOLDBERG: Adam Goldberg. I represent 22

Mitsubishi. 23

MR. FAIRHURST : Jon Fairhurst with Sharp 24

Labs of America. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 7 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens with the 1

Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. 2

MR. CHRISTIANSEN: Adam Christiansen with 3

the Appliance Standards Awareness Project

. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: I guess over to you, Celia. 5

MS. SHER: Celia Sher with the Department 6

of Energy General Counsel’s office. 7

MR. ROTOLO: Anthony Rotolo, Navigant 8

Consulting. 9

MR. CALWELL: I’ m Chris Calwell from 10

Ecova. 11

MR. DESROCHES: Louis Desroches , Lawrence 12

Berkeley National Lab. 13

MR. YODER: Chris Yoder, Navigant. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Brenda. 15

MS. EDWARDS: Brenda Edwards, Department 16

of Energy , 17

MR. SHARP: Mark Sharp, Panasonic. 18

MS. S YDNOR: Simone Sydnor, Department of 19

Energy

. 20

MS. FARBER: Julia Farber, Underwriters 21

Laboratory. 22

MS. RODULOVIS: Verna Rodulovis, EPA. 23

MR. TSAO: Allen Tsao , Navigant. 24

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Mia Forbes Pirie, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 8 Department of Energy

. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank s again to all of you. 2

I didn’t introduce myself. My name’s Doug Brookman 3

from Public Solutions in Baltimore. I’m glad to see 4

you here

. 5

**Agenda Review** 6

MR. BROOKMAN: I’m going to do a very 7

quick agenda review, and a ll of you received a 8

packet of information as you came in to the room and 9

as you registered today. Immediately following this 10

agenda review, Vic Petrolati is going to give a 11

brief rulemaking overview, and then after that 12

there’s an opportunity for anybody that wishes to do 13

so, to mak e brief opening remarks, issues that you 14

wish to bring to the fore. And then from there 15

we’ll drive straight in to the PowerPoint slides 16

that you have before you. Look at the detailed 17

content that the Department wants you to consider 18

and comment on. We’ ll take

– you can see as listed 19

in the agenda, a NOPR summary scope and definitions 20

beginning round about ten o’clock or so. We’ll take 21

a break round about eleven. We’ll move from there, 22

following the break, to testing conditions and 23

testing. We’ll take lunch midday. And then 24

following lunch, more information, quite a bit of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 9 additional analysis and information on testing and 1

energy efficiency metrics. Whenever we get there, 2

perhaps earlier than 4:45 or five, there’s an 3

opportunity for additional commen t, anything that 4

any person wishes to raise that they don’t think has 5

been covered sufficiently, and we’ll have a few 6

closing remarks. And that’s the plan for the day. 7

So questions and comments on the agenda? I see 8

none. 9

So I ask for your consideratio n. If you 10

would, p lease speak one at a time today. Please say 11

your name for the record each time you speak . There 12

will be a complete transcript of this meeting 13

available and we’ll make the site of that transcript 14

known to you. I’m going to be cueing in dividuals by 15

name as best I can. I also wish to encourage 16

follow

- on comment s . I think the Department find s it 17

useful to have i t back and forth on specific issues

. 18

If you can keep the focus here. Please t urn your 19

cell phones on silent mode. And also, there’s a lot 20

to be said. I’m certain we have 100 or so 21

PowerPoint slides here in the packet. If you can be 22

concise and share the air time, that would be 23

helpful. 24

So additional comments here before I turn 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 10 it back to Vic Petrolati ? Then bac k to Vic

. 1

**R ulemaking Overview**  2

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. For the most part, 3

Doug has covered the ground rules that we have up on 4

the screen, so let me start discussing the webcast. 5

We are having a webcast as part of the meeting. The 6

Department is broadca sting this meeting live over 7

the internet. DOE is providing the webcast to 8

accommodate stakeholders that are unable to attend 9

the meeting in person. The web broadcast allows 10

stakeholders to listen in and view the slides. All 11

stakeholders are encouraged to submit written 12

comments after the public meeting. We are going to 13

try to take, time permitting, questions from the 14

people from the webinar. They will be written 15

questions that we will be handed at the front table 16

to read, and again, these would be the secondary 17

questions we respond to. The first questions that 18

we respond to and take as much time as necessary are 19

from the people in this room. So that is the way 20

the webinar will go forward. 21

The purpose of the public meeting

– I’ll 22

just quickly lay ou t. It’s obviously to present 23

DOE’s proposed test procedure for television sets. 24

We’re here to answer questions about a proposed 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 11 approach. We want to seek comment, of course, from 1

all the stakeholders and input from participants on 2

our proposed testing a pproach; and to discuss the 3

NOPR published in the Federal Register which gives 4

notice of the public meeting and availability of the 5

NOPR document and describes the proposed test 6

procedure. 7

Okay. Request for comment boxes in the 8

format. We’ve got these types of comment boxes 9

throughout the presentation. These are comment 10

boxes in most cases specifically from comments that 11

were in the NOPR

. These are the issues that we are 12

seeking significant stakeholder input in. As you 13

can see the issue box in the te st procedure NOPR, 14

DOE welcomes comments. Throughout this presentation 15

specific issues will be raised for discussion on 16

slides such as this with identifying numbers 17

corresponding to those in the test procedure NOPR 18

document. In addition, DOE has added qu estions that 19

are not in the NOPR document. These questions are 20

identified by a letter. So these will be the areas 21

that we will try to focus our discussions and 22

comments on, but we do not want to limit in any 23

fashion, comment s or questions during the 24

pres entation. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 12 In terms of submitting the written 1

comments, you can refer to, obviously, the Notice of 2

Proposed Rule, the postal mail, e

- mail, for 3

submitting comments is up here, 4

television2010tp0026@ee.doe .gov . Postal mail, if 5

you’re submitting comments by postal mail, then it 6

will go to Brenda Edwards at this address. And 7

again, all of this information is, in fact, in the 8

Notice of Proposed Rule. Comment period closes on 9

April 3, 2012, so we would like to get your comments 10

in by that date. 11

Okay. Doug, opening remarks. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. As we 13

indicated, now’s an opportunity for anyone that 14

wishes to make opening remarks. Yes. Jon

. 15

**Opening Remarks** 16

MR. FAIRHURST : Yes, I did send in some 17

opening remarks. I realize I wrote them maybe more 18

fully than I needed to, so instead of reading them 19

verbatim, I prefer to give an overview. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon , those can be inserted. 21

They will be inserted in the record. 22

MR. FAIRHURST : Excellent. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: I mean the full text. 24

MR. FAIRHURST : Great. So the

– so 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 13 basically I have a full background involved with IEC 1

CEA standards development starting with 62087 in IEC 2

which kicked off this new generation of television 3

active or on mode testi ng. 4

One of the concerns that we have has to do 5

with the timing, in that because EPA allows testing 6

of the

– requires third party testing. The 7

possibility would be that it would

– that a new test 8

procedure would cause double testing. And then the 9

othe r main point of the comments were that we do 10

recommend very different ABC levels. Those would be 11

0, 12, 35 and 300. And I can go into more detail 12

probably later in the meeting here today. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. There’ll be 14

plenty of opportunity to raise those issues. Other 15

comments here at the outset? No additional opening 16

remarks? Okay. So we’re going to then launch 17

straight into the content in the PowerPoint slides, 18

and back to Victor Petrolati. I didn’t hear that. 19

MS. EDWARDS: Somebody on the phone ... 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Oh, not yet. We’ve got a 21

webmaster over here tracking, yes. We’re going to 22

try and make it possible for those joining us, as 23

Vic said, via the web, to pass their questions in 24

and try to respond to them as that happens. Okay , 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 14 Vic. 1

**Rulemaking History and Timeline**  2

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. First thing we’re 3

going to cover is the rulemaking history and 4

timeline. Surprisingly, the work by the Department 5

of Energy on televisions goes back quite a ways. 6

Doe first adopted a TV test procedure in 1979. As I 7

was telling the group that I’m working with 8

yesterday, I was in this program in 1979. I do not 9

remember us working on that TV test procedure, but 10

that was quite a while ago. The understanding is 11

that test procedure back then was strictly a test 12

procedure for a black and white cathode ray tube TV. 13

We don’t see too many of them left these days on the 14

store shops, although I can certainly tell you I’ve 15

got quite a few in my home at this point. 16

There was a significant change back in 17

2009 where we had a transition from the Federal 18

Communications Commission from analog to digital. 19

Subsequent to petitions from both the California 20

Energy Commission and the Consumer Electronics 21

Association, they petition for repeal of our current 22

test procedure. DOE repealed its test procedure for 23

black and white televisions on October 2009. 24

DOE published in September 2010, a request 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 15 for information for going forward for developing a 1

TV test procedure, and I want to thank a lot of the 2

people that a re here today. We got actually a 3

tremendous response on our request for information 4

that helped us quite a bit in terms of moving 5

forward to develop the TV test procedure. 6

Here we are today. DOE has published a 7

NOPR for the TV test procedure. We have a 75 day 8

comment period. We’ve got the meeting today on 9

March 22 nd , and we’ve got the comment period ending 10

on April 3 rd . So in a quick fashion, that is our 11

regulatory history associated with televisions. 12

Again, the notice of public meeting and proposed 13

rulemaking that was actually published on January 14

19 th , concerning this action, and we’ve got all the 15

supporting material concerning our rulemaking on our 16

website. All of the data that’s been collected, all 17

the justifications for the way we went forward in 18

developing this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 19

Okay. Let me just cover very quickly and 20

succinctly the rulemaking process. We had 21

completed, of course, the preliminary stage which 22

was started with our request for information. That 23

request was pub lished back in 2010, and again, we 24

received a tremendous amount of comments on that, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 16 that helped us quite a bit in formulating our Notice 1

of Proposed Rule. Notice of Proposed Rule was 2

published, again, on January 19 th . We have the 3

meeting here today on t he 22 nd . We expect the final 4

rule to be published most likely by the end of 5

September. One of the things that is always 6

interesting in a rulemaking process is you can never 7

anticipate both the types of comments or the 8

potential issues that will be identi fied at the 9

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking stage. If we do not 10

have anything new in terms of issues, we might have 11

finalized the rule in the June timeframe. If the 12

issues are complex and need further testing, then my 13

expectation is that it may take us as long as 14

September at this point. So that is our anticipated 15

timeframe for today, prior to getting all of the 16

comments in from the stakeholders. 17

Let’s talk about effective date and 18

compliance date. If adopted, the test procedure 19

becomes effective 30 da ys after the publication of 20

the final rule. What that means is that 21

stakeholders, after this 30 days, can decide to use 22

this test procedure for making representations. 23

However, all energy use representations made 180 24

days after the test procedure final r ule is 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 17 published, must make those representations in 1

accordance with this new test procedure. Is that a 2

question? Yes. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 4

MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you. This is Adam 5

Goldberg from Mitsubishi. So does this mean that 6

180 days after

– so me time between zero days and 180 7

days, we need to retest everything that is Energy 8

Star, for example? Or is it possible for EPA to say 9

Energy Star label is fine until you get around to 10

testing again, or a new model, or is it

– 11

MR. PETROLATI: Let me an swer that without 12

giving you a direct answer at this point. 13

MR. GOLDBERG: That’s fine. 14

MR. PETROLATI: We have been working 15

continuously with both EPA and FTC. They are aware 16

of the 180 day requirement. They have both agreed 17

to try to get their prog rams amended to meet that 18

requirement and to provide guidance to the industry. 19

I don’t want to get involved in telling you what 20

that guidance is from these organizations, but I 21

think they have a number of approaches in terms of 22

implementing this guidance. 23

MR. GOLDBERG: So I think what you just 24

said was they’re going to try to work to make it so 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 18 that it’s possible to use it. What I’m trying to 1

ask is, you know, if you publish this at the end of 2

September, it’ll take effect in March, and that is, 3

for som e cases, in the middle of a model year. 4

MR. PETROLATI: Right. 5

MR. GOLDBERG: And have to test and retest 6

things is a obstacle. 7

MR. PETROLATI: That comment has already 8

been made to EPA. They are certainly going to 9

consider how to move forward under that comment and 10

we’ll try to work with them as best we can in terms 11

of implementing the legislative requirements as 12

well. Okay. 13

I also want to mention , third box here, 14

DOE’s test procedure is developed for, but not 15

limited to the establishment for potential DOE 16

standards in the future, that’s the first step DOE 17

takes in terms of any standards setting exercise, 18

the first step is ge nerally to develop the test 19

procedures so that everybody has a common ground as 20

to how measurements are made and how data is 21

gathered for a potential standard in the future. 22

We have worked with the Federal Trade 23

Commission. We are working with the En vironmental 24

Protection Agency. There is no question that they 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 19 will be adopting this test procedure as part of 1

their programs. We also preempt any states from 2

issuing test procedures for televisions that are not 3

identical to the test procedures establishe d by the 4

Department of Energy. 5

Okay. Again, just want to emphasize

– 6

this is a question that comes up quite a bit

– how 7

did we basically develop a TV test procedure. 8

Bottom line is we used industry standards in any 9

place that we could. IEC 62087, the Energy Star 10

program requirements, and CEA2037 2009, and we’ve 11

also incorporated the CEA procedure for DAM testing 12

for TVs. So this was the basis for almost 13

everything that was done in this test procedure. 14

Any modifications that we made were modification s 15

either for clarity or to make sure that we had 16

proper tolerances associated with measurements or 17

instrumentation. So this is our basis, and we 18

believe that it’s pretty well accepted in terms of 19

both industry standards and standards established by 20

Energy Star. 21

Any questions on anything I may have 22

discussed in terms of the timeline, before we get to 23

our next presentation? (No response.) Looks good. 24

I’d like to introduce Chris Yoder from 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 20 Navigant Consulting. Navigant is responsible for 1

the developmen t of the TV test procedure and we’ll 2

have Chris and Anthony R o tolo here speaking on many 3

aspects of the test procedure. Okay, Chris. 4

**Test Procedures Overview** 5

MR. YODER: Thank you, Vic. All right, 6

well thank you guys for being here in person and 7

over the internet. This slide kind of represents 8

the four major steps to the test procedure. And as 9

Vic said earlier, we developed this test procedure 10

based on the IEC test procedure as well as the 11

Energy Star specification

. 12

The test procedure starts with a warm

- up 13

period that lasts one hour, as seen in the I E C test 14

procedure, followed by a luminance test in both the 15

home picture setting and the retail picture setting. 16

This test was put in place for other rulemaking 17

bodies, such as Energy Star. After the l uminance 18

test, depending on the television, whether it comes 19

with automatic brightness control enabled by 20

default, or whether the television comes with ABC 21

disabled when it’s shipped, or whether it’s not 22

available, determines the next step in the test 23

proc edure. 24

If the television comes with A B C enabled, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 21 the television set is tested in on mode at various 1

luminance levels. If it is not, it is tested in the 2

home picture setting. After the on mode test, a few 3

standby mode tests are conducted, including stan dby 4

passive mode and standby active high mode, which 5

incorporates the CEA download acquisition mode test. 6

After the standby mode test, there is an off mode 7

test which in essence, is tested if the television 8

has a hard off switch. 9

As Vic said, DOE has a website which 10

incorporates and has various pieces of information 11

and documents that goes over our analysis and data 12

that we have collected. Here’s a list of the 13

datasets that we have up currently on the website. 14

**Scope and Definitions** 15

Next I’m going to talk about the scope and 16

various definitions that we propose in the NOPR. 17

The scope that DOE has proposed in the NOPR includes 18

television sets of 15 inches and above which are 19

sold with a tuner. DOE has also updated definitions 20

to better suit the update s in television technology 21

since 1979. The old definitions included a 22

television set, a definition for color television 23

set and monochromatic television sets. The new 24

definition is one definition and as you can see 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 22 below, includes various aspects includi ng that it 1

must be powered by mains power source, must have a 2

diagonal screen size of 15 inches or larger, must be 3

manufactured with a TV tuner, and capable of 4

displaying dynamic digital information. 5

Because we researched and conducted 6

analysis of other test procedures that are currently 7

in the market, we thought it best to harmonize with 8

those test procedures and we pulled the majority of 9

our definitions from either IEC or Energy Star. For 10

additional clarification, DOE developed two 11

additional definitio ns for clarification in the 12

luminance testing, including the home picture 13

setting and the retail picture setting. 14

Doug, are you going to go over the issues, 15

or should I ask them? 16

MR. BROOKMAN: Go right ahead. 17

MR. YODER: Okay. So at this moment, ar e 18

there any comments regarding the scope of the 19

rulemaking, any of the definitions, or definitions 20

that DOE has created? 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Let’s see, is it B.J.? 22

MR. KUNDU : Bijit Kundu with Energy 23

Solutions. Has DOE looked at displays that may not 24

be ma nufactured with a tuner, where content comes 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 23 through an external tuner or displays that come sold 1

with tuners but are marketed for delivering 2

television content? 3

MR. YODER: Yeah, I believe the question 4

whether there are televisions that are sold in the 5

stores that do not come with a tuner and require the 6

purchase of an additional television tuner. Is that 7

the question? Yes, DOE looked into this and because 8

it’s a NOPR, we’re willing to change the scope if 9

you want to provide comment as to your opinion on 10

the topic. So we did assess whether or not to 11

include that in the scope. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Would you say that in the 13

proposed definition they would be included? 14

MR. YODER: In the proposed definition we 15

have that they are sold with a tuner, so if the 16

device is

– if the television is sold as one 17

package, it would included in the scope, but if it’s 18

two separate purchases, I guess, two different line 19

items on your receipt, then it would not be 20

included. 21

MR. KANOU: Okay. It’s a little unclear 22

because i t says manufactured with a tuner, I don’t 23

know if that means internal or something external, 24

of if that includes external tuners. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 24 MR. YODER: Okay. We will add 1

clarification. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic Petrolati. 3

MR. PETROLATI: The term manufactured is 4

actually a legislative term that includes assembled, 5

and we’re taking a look at this issue. We are 6

certainly not interested at this point, nor do I 7

think we have the legal capabilities of indicating 8

that Best Buy is a manufacturer because it sells 9

both a tuner and a display to a certain individual. 10

So the question of sold with will have to be 11

defined, and most likely by the definition of 12

manufactured, which does include assembling, and 13

certainly if the tuner is placed in the same box by 14

the particular man ufacturer of the product, we would 15

certainly be covering that. Beyond that, we’re 16

going to have to take a close look at this issue. 17

MR. BROOKMAN: And so detailed comments on 18

that would be useful. Jon

. 19

MR. FAIRHURST : Jon Fairhurst with Sharp 20

Labs of America. Regarding the retail and home mode 21

– retail picture setting and home mode or home 22

picture setting, I noted those definitions aren’t 23

necessarily as I would expect. For instance, as I 24

recall, retail is the brightest

– what is it , the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 25 brightest selectable mode? It had to do with being 1

the brightest as compared to identifying the mode 2

that is

– or the setting of the television when t it 3

has a forced menu, and the retail is chosen. So 4

that might not be identical. Here it is

– “Th e 5

preset setting at which the TV produces the highest 6

luminance during the on mode conditions.” And 7

that’s not necessarily the same as what we would 8

expect to be in the retail setting. So if you 9

wanted to use this definition, it should be called 10

maybe, b rightest mode or something like this, as 11

compared to retail mode. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 13

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, I mean I think maybe 14

a little bit of background might be helpful, I 15

suppose. TVs typically are going to come with the 16

forced menu, which is an artifact of a number of 17

places including Energy Star, and the idea is when 18

that’s done, to make it easy for a retailer to 19

select the mode which works well with 30 foot 20

ceilings and fluorescent lights and people standing 21

on their feet six feet away. And de vices are sold 22

typically with quite different settings than at the 23

home. T ypically, they’re very bright and that may 24

not be the brightest possible setting for the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 26 device, and I think that’s what Jon is getting at. 1

You might need to bend over backwards to find a way 2

that is brighter, but that doesn’t mean that it’s 3

impossible. So, with this definition, it might be 4

that even though a device comes with a home and 5

retail forced menu setting, that the retail picture 6

setting is not the retail setting, right, w hich is a 7

bit confusing and maybe it’s intended, but it would 8

certainly stand for

– if that’s the way the rule 9

goes, it could certainly stand for some clarity that 10

retail mode isn’t retail mode, necessarily, which is 11

kind of funny. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Additional comments? 13

You can see the comment box there. The Department’s 14

asking for several different bits of information, 15

not only definitions, but also scope and displays 16

greater than 15 inches sold with a TV tuner. 17

Additional comments on those? Okay . Yes, Bill. 18

MR. SCHINDLER : Yes, were we able to offer 19

comments on the definitions of the standby passive 20

at this time? 21

MR. PETROLATI: We’re going to come to 22

that a little later. 23

MR. YODER: Yeah, later on. 24

MR. SCHINDLER : Okay. Great. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 27 MR. BR OOKMAN: Thanks for inquiring. 1

Let’s proceed. 2

MR. YODER: Next I’m going to turn to 3

Anthony Rotolo to talk about the testing conditions 4

and instrumentation. 5

**Testing Conditions and Instrumentation** 6

MR. ROTOLO: Thanks, Chris. So I’m going 7

to discuss th e testing conditions, and as you can 8

see the power voltage and frequency were taken from 9

Energy Star and so one percent had 115 volts AC, and 10

60 hertz with a tolerance of one percent. 11

Similarly, total harmonic distortion was taken from 12

IEC and has a toler ance

– or a requirement of five 13

percent. Power factor will be measured, and that 14

will be for other regulating bodies to use. And the 15

uncertainty requirement was also taken from Energy 16

Star. 17

So the light measurement devices. This 18

requirement covers a ll illuminance meters and 19

luminance meters, and this is for testing

– this is 20

for the illuminance test and for on mode test. 21

These pieces of equipment will be required. 22

Specification covers both of them, and also for 23

luminance devices, luminance meters. This covers a 24

distance luminance meter and a contact luminance 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 28 meter. The only caveat that I’d like to make is the 1

acceptance angle for the light measurement devices 2

is only for luminance meters, whereas illuminance 3

meter you have, roughly you have a dom e where it 4

averages light over 180 degrees. 5

And at this time DOE seeks comments from 6

interested parties on L M D equipment specifications 7

proposed in the NOPR. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Adam. 9

MR. GOLDBERG: This is Adam Goldberg from 10

Mitsubishi. Can you exp lain what the parenthetical 11

means, plus/minus two percent, plus or minus two 12

digits? 13

MR. ROTOLO: Yeah. We have a slide that 14

shows an example. Chris, where’s that slide? 15

MR. BROOKMAN: In the appendix? 16

MR. ROTOLO: It’s actually not in the 17

printed out slides, but we have an example slide. 18

Yeah, here it is. So what this means is depending 19

on the resolution that the meter is displaying, the 20

last decimal place can vary. So for a low light 21

situation, if, you know, you are only looking at a 22

low light situation of a few nits (ph), your 23

resolution on your screen would change, and it 24

varies

– the tolerance. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 29 MR. BROOKMAN: What is nits? 1

MR. ROTOLO: Nits is the measurement of 2

screen luminance

– candela s per meter squared

. 3

MR. GOLDBERG: So the plus or minus two 4

percent, plus or minus two digits, is plus or minus 5

two percent

– is plus or minus the quantity of two 6

percent plus twice the least significant digit? 7

MR. ROTOLO: Least significant digit. 8

Yes. And this was taken from the VESA standard for 9

lighting. 10

MR. GOLDBERG: VESA. 11

MR. ROTOLO: Or Vee

- sa (ph). 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Would you spell that? 13

MR. ROTOLO: V

- E

- S

- A. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Okay. So 15

that’s useful, that’s helpful. Yes, please. 16

Christopher, find a microphone. 17

MR. YOD ER: We can make this and other 18

examples available on the website if that would be 19

beneficial. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. So additional 21

questions and comments on this before we return to 22

where we were previously? Okay, we’re going back. 23

And we are now at about slide 25 and the Department 24

is seeking comment from interested parties on the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 30 L M D equipment specifications proposed in this NOPR. 1

Anything additional? Okay. Let’s proceed. 2

MR. ROTOLO: So for the L M D requirements 3

that a luminance meter is a d istance luminance 4

meter. DOE is proposing a darkroom condition that 5

shall not exceed one lux in a darkroom. Now this 6

specification comes from IEC. Also the ambient 7

light temperature, the ambient temperature and 8

humidity of 23 degrees plus or minus five degrees. 9

This comes from both IEC and Energy Star, and a 10

relative humidity of 20 percent to 80 percent comes 11

from Energy Star. 12

Now signal source and generation. This 13

will be using the IEC 62087 dynamic video content. 14

This material is accepted, industr y accepted content 15

and this was based on comments from stakeholders 16

from the RFI. 17

DOE seeks comments from interested parties 18

on signal and source generation specified in this 19

NOPR. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Let me say it’s also a good 21

thing to hear from stakeho lders if the Department’s 22

landing close to the mark. Do you think this is 23

good, then it’s helpful to know that as well. You 24

can include that in your written comments. Jon

. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 31 MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst, Sharp Labs 1

of America. Yes, certainly we suppor t using the 2

dynamic broadcast content from IEC. It is the 3

accepted standard around the world right now. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Is that called dynamic 5

broadcast content? 6

MR. FAVORS: Yes, it is actually called 7

dynamic broadcast content. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Not dynamic 9

video content. For the clarification, thank you. 10

Okay. 11

MR. ROTOLO: So we’ll now be moving to the 12

luminance test. The major change that we have made 13

from the Energy Star procedure is that DOE is 14

proposing that the luminance test wi ll be performed 15

before on mode testing. And the reason for this 16

change is that throughout DOE testing, we discovered 17

that for certain TV models, by placing the TV in 18

home picture setting first, it was unable to be put 19

into retail settings. So then if the luminance test 20

came after the on mode test, you would be unable to 21

test it in that retail picture setting. So the 22

very first test will be the retail luminance test, 23

then you’d place the TV into the home picture 24

setting where you would do the remainder o f the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 32 luminance test, and then move on to the on mode 1

test. 2

So this is where we’re going to talk about 3

the two picture settings. We talked about them 4

briefly earlier, but

– so DOE is proposing a home 5

and retail picture setting. These settings will be 6

u sed primarily for other regulating bodies to use in 7

a ratio, comparing home picture setting to retail 8

picture settings. And then the retail, like we 9

said, I said on the last slide, the retail picture 10

setting will only be used during the luminance test. 11

So as you can see, these are the 12

definitions that appear in the NOPR. The home 13

picture setting is a picture setting which is 14

recommended by manufacturers from the initial setup 15

menu or model that the television comes shipped in, 16

if no setting is recommend ed. The retail setting is 17

the picture setting in which the TV produces the 18

highest luminance during the on mode conditions. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 20

MR. GOLDBERG: Adam Goldberg from 21

Mitsubishi. One more comment on retail picture 22

setting . In addition to what I said before, it’s 23

also true that with this definition, only the 24

manufacturer will know what

– how to put something 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 33 in the retail picture setting. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: There’s no on screen

-- 2

MR. GOLDBERG: No, but see,

-- 3

MR. BROOKMAN:

-- toggle, or

– 4

MR. GOLDBERG: Not with this definition. 5

So under the way things work now, is when the device 6

is first powered up, you’re given a choice, retail 7

or home mode, and the retailer will pick retail, and 8

home people pick home and all’s well. As I said 9

before, the retail mode may not be the absolute 10

brightest settings possible. If the retail mode is 11

not the absolute brightest settings possible, then 12

retail mode doesn’t fit this definition, and only 13

the manufacturer would know that, and only the 14

manufact urer probably would know what combinations 15

of settings would turn brightness all the way up. 16

It might be be tter to not mess with the definitions 17

and do what we’re doing now in terms of the

– at 18

worse, this is a tiny problem in terms of the 19

luminance diffe rence, but in terms of repeatability 20

and conformance with the language, it might be a 21

real hassle. 22

MR. ROTOLO: And could you propose 23

language for retail home setting that you think

– 24

MR. GOLDBERG: I will certainly try. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 34 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Jon

. 1

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, this is Jon 2

Fairhurst, Sharp Labs of America. On the same 3

topic, it’s important that we define this properly 4

so that it is testing as would be seen in retail 5

because of the initial reason for doing the 6

luminance ratio test. The idea is that you want to 7

compare what does the consumer see in the store and 8

when they go home, you don’t want them to see a 9

television picture that is much, much darker, so 10

that’s the basis for this 65 percent ratio that 11

we’ve seen in Energy Star. So we reall y do want to 12

compare what the consumer is seeing at retail and if 13

that’s not the brightest picture setting, then it 14

really doesn’t

– it’s not appropriate to do the 15

ratio based on the brightest picture setting. It is 16

truly

-- because the user might not be seeing the 17

brightest picture setting, it’s truly what did they 18

see in the store versus what do they see at home. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Isn’t the manufacturer 20

going to set some default for that? 21

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, and that’s exactly 22

right. As Adam mentioned earlier, there is a 23

concept of a forced menu. So in the past, 24

televisions were all shipped extremely bright to 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 35 compete on the retail floor. And so then when 1

consumers brought the televisions home, they were 2

also in these overly bright settings, and cons uming 3

much more energy than they needed to. So one of the 4

key inventions, if you will, during 62087’s 5

development within IEC, was to develop the concept 6

of the forced menu. So with the forced menu, you 7

are presented when you first turn the television on, 8

with a choice of retail or home. And so then the 9

retailer can choose retail so these new televisions 10

would still compete with the old TVs that are in 11

what was called torch mode at the time, and when 12

they’re brought home, then the consumer chooses home 13

mo de and gets, potentially, a much more pleasing 14

picture. I guess it’s not saturating so high, and 15

also much more efficient television. So it was a 16

very good program. 17

So for those televisions that have the 18

forced menu setting, yes, there is a preset menu 19

only available at first start up, typically, and in 20

addition the televisions that don’t have forced 21

menu, it’s simply out of the box is what you would 22

expect to see at retail. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill. 24

MR. SCHINDLER: I concur with both Adam 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 36 and Jon , but b asically in terms of a wording for the 1

definition, I would think it would be very similar 2

to the home picture setting definition, in that 3

there would be an or condition. It would be the 4

retail setting or, in the case where there is no 5

forced menu, it woul d be the brightest preset 6

setting available. And when we say preset, which 7

you have in your definition, we’re not talking about 8

changing all kinds of menu issues. I’m sure that 9

you’re saying preset meaning exactly that, you know, 10

there’s only three or fo ur or five choices of 11

presets. It’s very simple to set the brightest 12

preset. It’s usually called something like vivid or 13

dynamic, and it’s very easy to do. And really just 14

putting an or condition, saying the retail mode or 15

in the case of their being no forced menu, the 16

brightest preset. And that’s very consistent with 17

both California and Energy Star. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Charlie. 19

MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. I would 20

like to ask the manufacturers what

– if that isn’t

– 21

if retail or vivid, dynamic, whatever you want to 22

call it, is not the brightest setting, what is the 23

point of having a setting brighter than that? 24

MR. SCHLINDER: In our case the brightest 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 37 setting, which we call sometimes vivid, sometimes 1

dynamic, is the retail setting. An d in most cases 2

it would be because in a retail environment, 3

especially the large retail environments that have 4

very bright lighting from 40 foot ceilings, the only 5

way to compete is to put it, quite frankly, in the 6

brightest setting. Now, that’s what we’ re 7

experiencing. There may be some outliers, but 8

generally if it’s covered in the definition, that’s 9

stated in Energy Star and IEC. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 11

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, I mean, I think that 12

without a definition for preset, it might be tough 13

to sa y. I think what Bill is talking about the five 14

or so different picture settings that you get, then 15

it’s easy enough to swap between them, but just 16

because there are presets like that doesn’t mean 17

it’s not possible to go in and manually adjust 18

contrast and brightness and a handful of other 19

things to make the brightest possible picture. Now 20

I mean you shouldn’t ever do that, and I mean if 21

that’s brighter than the forced menu retail, then 22

there’s probably downsides to it. There’s lots of 23

tuning that goes on to make the TVs look as good as 24

you can, and there’s lots of knobs and dials to turn 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 38 inside, so to speak. But it might be that there are 1

ways to configure the set to make something 2

brighter, even if that would likely never ever be 3

done, and that’s what I ’m sort of trying to avoid. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 5

Additional

– yes, Vic Petrolati. 6

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, I was going to ask 7

Bill a follow up question. Bill, is it generally 8

the case that the manufacturer will include in the 9

owner’s manual a ny information to the consumer as to 10

which is the brightest picture setting for that 11

television? 12

MR. SCHLINDER: In the operation manual, 13

whether it’s an on line electronic or paper, there’s 14

only four or five modes, and they’re described. And 15

generally the description for the vivid or dynamic 16

mode will say something like, for the brightest 17

environment, you know, as to whether it says this is 18

the brightest mode, I’m not sure about that. It 19

would clearly lead one to believe that that’s the 20

brightest mode. The other ones are like movie mode. 21

Well, clearly, that’s done in a dark home theater 22

kind of environment. Then there’s one like sports. 23

There’s one like game. But the word vivid and 24

dynamic usually is associated with the description 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 39 indicating that it’s for a bright environment. 1

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. For your particular 2

company, do you actually manufacture a mode or modes 3

that are brighter than the retail mode for the 4

consumer? 5

MR. SCHLINDER: Not as preset settings. 6

As Adam said, one could go and start playing with 7

advance picture settings

– contrast, brightness, 8

color settings

– you could do those kinds of things, 9

backlight settings, but they’re not presets. 10

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. 11

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, I mean

– 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 13

M R. GOLDBERG: Sorry, Adam Goldberg from 14

Mitsubishi. Part of my problem maybe with this 15

definition is we’re missing

– there’s not a 16

definition for what preset is. Maybe that might 17

clear things up. 18

MR. ROTOLO: Okay. 19

MR. GOLDBERG: Because, I mean, c hances 20

are TVs have a picture mode button or something 21

which cycles between four or five different things, 22

but if those

– if those are the presets in terms of 23

definition, then maybe we’re okay. But if that’s 24

not, then it gets more difficult. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 40 MR. PETROLA TI: That was certainly our 1

approach, and you’re right, I don’t think we defined 2

it any place in the NOPR, and possibly putting in 3

the definition solves the problem. But again, we’re 4

very interested in getting your comments on this. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 6

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst, Sharp Labs. 7

The question earlier was why might a manufacturer 8

have a brighter mode, and there are a couple of 9

reasons that a manufacturer might have a brighter 10

mode. One would be that based on testing, because 11

we need to meet this 65 percent ration, that the 12

television may be capable of a very bright signal, 13

but we don’t want to make the retail mode too 14

bright. We don’t want to make the

– in order to be 15

within the 65 percent, so a manufacturer might

– I’m 16

not saying that Sharp is doing this today

– but a 17

manufacturer might choose to do a set of very 18

reasonable home mode and then a retail mode that is 19

within that and there could be a higher brightness 20

mode for two basic reasons. One would be if the 21

television might be view ed outside on a deck, so 22

kind of sunlight mode, if you will. And another 23

reason might be if a manufacturer wishes to claim 24

the television is capable of very, very high 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 41 brightness. So in the specifications it might say 1

it’s four, or five, six, or a thousa nd nits or 2

whatever that it’s capable of, so the people who 3

wish to view things in extremely bright environments 4

would know, oh, this is a good television for me to 5

buy. But in order to keep within the 65, to have 6

good efficiency in the home, the manufact urer of 7

such a bright television might

– and I’m not saying 8

they’re doing this today

– but might choose to set 9

retail at a lower level. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 11

Additional comments on these definitions. 12

MR. ROTOLO: I just wanted to touch on one 13

other thing, is the easy to access picture settings. 14

So DOE had noticed during testing that on certain 15

remotes, you can access additional picture settings 16

that might be easily done. We definitely covered 17

home and retail picture setting, but DOE also 18

requested comments on easy to access picture 19

settings and if those modes should be looked into as 20

well. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. Regarding 23

the easy

- to

- access picture settings, testing all of 24

the modes would add significant cost because , you 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 42 know, for instance, we may be looking at testing at 1

four different settings for automatic brightness 2

control and so forth, so you m ultiply all those 3

tests with the number of picture settings, and the 4

test costs could get very high. 5

There’s also no data that I’m aware of 6

that would give insight to how often the various 7

picture settings might be chosen, how popular is 8

sports mode vers us movie mode, for instance. And 9

then in addition, the naming of the picture settings 10

is not necessarily consistent across manufacturers. 11

So you can’t

– or even across models, yes. So 12

there’s not a standard set of names where you could 13

say oh, everyone needs to test in, let’s say sports 14

mode. Because not all TVs may use that word or

– 15

and the meaning is open to interpretation, for, once 16

again, across manufacturers and models. 17

MR. BROOKMAN: So how should the 18

Department address this issue? 19

MR. FAIRH URST: I think that the correct 20

approach is to test, certainly in the home mode, 21

possibly in retail mode or brightest mode, but at a 22

maximum only one additional mode that would be found 23

in television. That’s what Energy Star is doing 24

now. They require th at we report the power in 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 43 multiple modes. Course, to keep the price of 1

testing down, the manufacturers would prefer the one 2

mode, but certainly testing all the modes would be 3

very expensive and would not necessarily provide 4

much additional benefit. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Bijit ? 6

MR. KUNDU : Bijit , yes. Bijit Kundu with 7

Energy Solutions. Just to clarify, these modes that 8

you’re talking about are just for the luminance 9

testing, is that right? 10

MR. ROTOLO: Yes, that’s correct. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Additional comme nts? 12

MR. ROTOLO: Okay. So let me walk through 13

this slowly. It’s quite an overwhelming graph. So, 14

during DOE’s

– question? 15

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Bill. 16

MR. SCHLINDER: I’m sorry. Excuse me. 17

This is in reference to the question from Vic. I 18

actually looked it up in the manual, specifically. 19

Our most bright mode, which is our retail mode, when 20

you go into the settings, it’s called vivid, and it 21

says, provides

– in the manual

– provides enhanced 22

picture contrast and sharpness for viewing in a 23

well

- lit room. That’s the instructions to the user. 24

So it doesn’t imply that it would be the brightest. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 44 It doesn’t say the word brightest. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks. 2

MR. ROTOLO: For luminance testing this 3

was part of DOE’s investigations. Prior to any 4

testing, Chris mentioned earlier that there would be 5

a one hour warm up period with a dynamic broadcast 6

clip, and you can see that right here. This is the 7

timeline, and this is a one hour period. After the 8

one hour period, the luminance was recorded

– th e 9

luminance was recorded in a 15 minute interval, and 10

as you can see through this data point, and other 11

data points here, there was a decline in luminance 12

and this decline is best illustrated by a feature 13

called automatic brightness limiting, where the TV 14

will recognize that it’s displaying a static 15

content, and it will decrease the luminance

– let me 16

go back

– it will decrease the luminance, and to 17

avoid this, DOE is proposing that testing for 18

luminance will be measured immediately rather than 19

in a ten or 15 minute stabilization period, like 20

Energy Star currently specifies. 21

This is just saying that rather than 22

having that ten minute stabilization period where it 23

could possibly fall into a lower brightness, DOE 24

would like luminance to be measured immediate ly, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 45 preceding the warm

- up period. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 2

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. Yeah, I 3

think we need to be careful about distinguishing the 4

warm

- up of the television with the potential for 5

going into a power saving mode or a brightness 6

limiting mode, you know, screen saving or some mode 7

that avoids degradation of the screen. In our 8

initial work in IEC we found that the

– of course we 9

were looking mostly at energy, but I’m aware of the 10

brightness as well. Brightness for especially CCFL 11

televisio ns can change quite a bit based on the 12

warm

- up times, so it’s appropriate to have a warm

- up 13

time, but not necessarily a static burn

- in time. 14

And so if the warm

- up is done with a dynamic 15

content, then you’re not likely to go into this 16

screen saving mode or burnout avoiding mode. So I 17

think it’s important to warm

- up the television with 18

dynamic content and then quickly measure, based on 19

the static content. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Is that not in the test 21

procedure, that you’re using some dynamic media 22

during this ho ur

– during this warm

- up period. 23

MR. FAIRHURST: Right, so we advocate for 24

that. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 46 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 1

MR. ROTOLO: So let me now speak on behalf 2

of the various test patterns that DOE looked into. 3

So there were four major test patterns that DOE 4

inv estigated. There was the three bar video

– or 5

three bar test pattern. There was the nine point

– 6

there’s a five point through a DOE modification, and 7

then there was the dynamic video signal or dynamic 8

broadcast signal with a square in the center which 9

IE C was in the process of developing. So these four 10

various test patterns all had various APLs, which is 11

the average picture level. Essentially it’s the 12

white content compared to the dark content, and 13

that’s what that ratio is. As you can see, the 14

three b ars, you know, half and half, half white and 15

half dark, and it has a 50 percent APL, whereas nine 16

point is significantly darker and has a 17 percent 17

APL. 18

So we’ll go into each of the video signals 19

and kind of highlight the advantages and 20

disadvantages of each. So the first is the three 21

bar signal, and the major advantage of this signal 22

is it’s an industry standard right now. It’s used 23

by Energy Star; it’s used by IEC, CEC; and it’s 24

available as part of the IEC standard. The 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 47 limitations of the standard is that it’s relatively 1

higher APL compared to 34 percent, which is seen as 2

a typical APL of TVs, and with that higher APL, some 3

TVs will either emphasize the bright content, or for 4

other screens, they’ll dim the content. And to 5

avoid that, because it is a static image, to avoid 6

this issue, that was part of the reason DOE proposed 7

measuring it immediately. 8

So the nine point was part of a Chinese 9

standard. It’s lower than the typical 34 percent 10

APL and the advantage of this clip is that it 11

reduces the AP L effect, although it was seen on 12

certain TVs still, kind of illustrating that no clip 13

is perfect for all TVs. 14

This signal was developed based on

– 15

that’s a five point clip, but it was modified for a 16

34 percent APL. It is a five point test clip. 17

And finally, the dynamic broadcast video 18

signal. So for this clip, it’s based off of the IEC 19

video dynamic broadcast whereas two white squares in 20

the center and every 30 seconds, I believe, the 21

white and black space alternate so that, again, to 22

avoid any typ e of static feature that the TV might 23

recognize. Now with this, the white space, the 24

luminance on the white space, it will kind of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 48 continuously change in luminance. But IEC was in 1

the process of developing this one. So there’s no

– 2

at this time, it’s no t part of the IEC test 3

procedure. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Bijit

. 5

MR. KUNDU : Maybe Jon can answer this 6

question. Is the idea for IEC to replace the three 7

bar image with this? 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 9

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. This 10

wasn’t actually being developed by IEC itself, but 11

an IEC member, participant in IEC, as a possible 12

proposal. So

– and in addition, the current IEC 13

standards do not have luminance testing whatsoever. 14

So we’re looking at including a stan dard for pattern 15

– for luminance testing. That’s not provided at 16

this time. 17

MR. KUNDU : Bijit Kundu , Energy Solutions. 18

Could you say what image is being considered, or has 19

it just not been finalized? 20

MR. FAIRHURST: It’s still in discussion, 21

so IEC d oesn’t have any statement on it just now, 22

but there are various proposals from various 23

constituents. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: You’re considering several 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 49 different possibilities ? 1

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So you can see 3

there, it’s

– please, Ch ristopher

. 4

MR. YODER: Chris Yoder. Navigant. Are 5

there any test patterns that you’re considering that 6

we haven’t considered? 7

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 8

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. Not to my 9

knowledge, and in fact, we don’t yet have a 10

consensus that we will definitely include a 11

luminance test pattern at this time, though I 12

believe it’s

– well, on one hand, it’s likely in 13

that most areas of the globe where they are testin g 14

television power, are testing luminance as well. On 15

the other hand, there’s not once consensus 16

internationally, and so it might be difficult for 17

IEC to gain consensus at this time. So right now, 18

it’s very much up in the air. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic Petrola ti. 20

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, one of our concerns 21

with changing the current test pattern was we were 22

not clear how that might affect the actual ratio 23

that’s been established previously by Energy Star 24

for the three bar pattern. And we’d be very 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 50 interested in getting the information from the 1

stakeholders as to if we switched to another 2

pattern, would there be correlation between the 65 3

percent ratio that’s currently established under the 4

three bar pattern? And whether that correlation 5

would hold under other lu minance patterns. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 7

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, Jon Fairhurst again. 8

I think the main change that we are almost certainly 9

– that one could certainly see if you were to use a 10

lower APL test pattern is that the plasma 11

televisions right now a re almost certain to saturate 12

with the three bar signal, saturate their automatic 13

brightness limiting or power limiting. And so based 14

on that , your not likely to see much difference 15

between retail mode and home mode when doing the 16

testing with plasma tele visions, and so that would 17

be like the change, but that’s really a shortcoming 18

that we have today. For simpler CCFL televisions, 19

the LCD televisions that did very little backlight 20

dimming or very simple backlight dimming, the 21

pattern doesn’t make much dif ference. And when you 22

start talking about more interesting backlight 23

limiting circuits, and sometimes spatial limiting 24

and so forth, dynamic backlights that can put light 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 51 in one segment of the screen while darkening another 1

segment of the screen, things g et more complex 2

depending on where things overlap. The algorithms 3

are extremely complex so it’s difficult to say what 4

would happen with televisions of that nature. 5

MR. PETROLATI: One other comment, we do 6

have test data on our website that indicates the 7

type of testing that we’ve done in this particular 8

area. Our test data was a little different than the 9

test data that was gathered by CLASP where they 10

showed clearly that any TV tested under the nine 11

point pattern generally had a higher luminance in 12

both retail mode and home mode than a TV tested 13

under the three bar pattern. We did not find that 14

in our own results, and our own results, 15

surprisingly enough, TVs that were tested in home at 16

the nine point pattern in many cases were actually 17

lower in luminan ce values, than they were in the 18

three bar pattern. That significantly changed the 19

ratio from the three bar pattern being used to the 20

nine point. So again, there would probably have to 21

be considerable work done, not only in determining 22

what the best test pattern is, but potentially what 23

the best ratio is associated with these programs as 24

well, in establishing it. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 52 MR. BROOKMAN: Bill. 1

MR. SCHLINDER: This is Bill from 2

Panasonic. I completely agree with both Jon and 3

Vic. These are very complicated dev ices. I just 4

came from a demo I was doing up in Canada where I 5

was showing, with our LED displays, given the 6

pattern, what LED zones were turning off, saving 7

energy, and it depended upon the pattern. And I was 8

describing to the audience that, you know, t hese are 9

very intelligent devices and they optimize black 10

level depending upon the pattern. So given that 11

just that one technology has such a variance 12

depending on pattern, now when we start looking at 13

LEDs in addition to Plasma, to CCFLs, and of course 14

O LEDs that are now just making the market, this is a 15

Pandora’s box. And furthermore, in Europe, they 16

have a definition saying the brightness pattern will 17

be such that there is no automatic brightness 18

limiting, and it now precludes a single pattern from 19

bei ng used in Europe. 20

So our position is that we’ve got five 21

years of experience with Energy Star, and most 22

recently with CDC using the three bar pattern, and 23

we think the approach of the DOE using that is a 24

correct one. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 53 MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 1

MR. GOLDB ERG: This is Adam Goldberg from 2

Mitsubishi. I think that I expect our comments will 3

support the DOE’s position to choose the three bar 4

pattern. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 6

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, I think there are a 7

couple of possibilities. One assumption has been 8

that we need one pattern. There’s also the 9

possibility of saying you choose whichever gives the 10

brightest, but once again that adds more 11

complication, and that would be one way to show a 12

television that does dimming under one condition or 13

the other, you would be more likely to be testing 14

the television that’s not doing dimming with that 15

pattern, or at least a minimum amount of dimming 16

with that pattern. 17

But moving back to the initial discussion 18

with EPA. Industry did not support the luminance 19

te sting at all because it’s extremely complex, and 20

one would hope that the manufacturers would be 21

delivering televisions that have bright enough 22

pictures that satisfy consumers, because if we 23

don’t, then we get a bad image, bad brand image, and 24

we’d like to avoid that so that we can continue to 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 54 sell televisions. So actually that would be the 1

ideal situation is unless there is evidence that 2

shows that consumers are getting televisions that 3

are overly dark, they’re unhappy with them, they’re 4

changing the brigh tness regularly because of it, to 5

actually avoid brightness testing. 6

MR. ROTOLO: Okay. So just before we go 7

over this one, I’d just like to emphasize that 8

although there are two test patterns on this slide, 9

DOE just, for the purpose of looking at vario us 10

measurement locations, that’s why the nine points is 11

utilized. DOE is proposing the three bar. And so 12

with multiple test patterns and multiple locations, 13

it brings up the issue of where do you measure? Is 14

a single measurement sufficient? 15

And so D OE is proposing that one single 16

measurement in the center of the screen, and through 17

DOE investigation, we looked at taking multiple 18

measurements, determining an average, and comparing 19

the average measurement of multiple points in home 20

mode to the average measurement of points in retail 21

mode, and we found that these averages are 22

comparable. So although we know that, you know, 23

screens, you know, measuring at multiple points you 24

won’t see uniformity across your screen that if you 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 55 take the ratio, you’ll still see the same ratio 1

regardless of the number of points that you see with 2

an average. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 4

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst . I concur, 5

one measurement is adequate by measuring across the 6

screen, you’re measuring the falloff of the lighting 7

of the screen, and variance across the screen, as 8

compared to the perceived luminance the consumer 9

will see. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: So you agree with this 11

approach. 12

MR. FAIRHURST: Oh, yes, I concur. 13

MR. ROTOLO: Okay. So at this time DOE 14

requests comments on the following issues: DOE 15

proposed luminance ratio, the test signal, and any 16

additional test signals. DOE also seeks comments on 17

the warm

- up characteristics involved in warming up 18

the TV to alig n with IEC. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: We’ve covered some of 20

these, but let’s be thorough here. Please look at 21

these issue boxes. Let’s get additional comment. 22

Jon

. 23

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, there is some 24

additional information about the warm

- up time, not 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 56 necessaril y for luminance, because IEC doesn’t 1

measure luminance, but there’s quite a well 2

described warm

- up time for the power measurements 3

that could be applied here that have to do with 4

warming up for

– see, I don’t remember the exact 5

details, but it’s at least a n hour, but no longer 6

than a couple of hours or so. So that’s in Clause 7

11 of the IEC test procedure. It’s 11.4.2 shows the 8

detailed stabilization that is used. 9

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 10

MR. KUNDU : B i j it Kundu with Ener gy 11

Solutions. Just t o be clear, on issue five. DOE 12

isn’t proposing a specific ratio here in this test 13

procedure, is that right? 14

MR. ROTOLO: Yes, that’s correct. This is 15

primarily used for other regulating bodies if they 16

are willing to use a ratio. 17

MR. KUNDU : Okay. So DOE is proposing 18

they can take two measurements and do a ratio, what 19

that specific is

– that 65 percent or something 20

else. 21

MR. ROTOLO: Yeah, and DOE is also just 22

requesting comments if you think that a ratio should 23

be included, although at this time part of the 24

proposal is not to include a ratio, but

– 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 57 MR. KUNDU : Yeah, I would think that not 1

including it in the proposal would be appropriate 2

for this test procedure. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Vic. 4

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, we’re going to have 5

to clarify

– n o, we aren’t interested in proposing a 6

ratio. We are interested in proposing a luminance 7

ratio test and the only people that we believe will 8

establish the ratio are the other stakeholders, and 9

the ratio will not be put into the DOE test. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Take a look one more 11

time, issue five, six, seven and issue A, which is 12

a new issue that wasn’t included previously, so 13

additional comments on these. Yes, Bill. 14

MR. SCHLINDER: This comment is in 15

reference to the warm

- up sequence. We understand , 16

as was already stated, that the reason the luminance 17

testing is preceding the power testing is because 18

you found some TVs, once they got put into I guess 19

it was home mode, couldn’t go into retail mode. I 20

understand that. It’s not a problem with our TVs , 21

probably others have that. Where our factory was 22

concerned, they had no issue with that, but the 23

power testing and the IEC was concerned when we 24

developed the standard as Jon said, with the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 58 stabilization of the device just prior to the power 1

measurement . So the factory is concerned about 2

repeatability such that if we’re doing these 3

luminance test s and then

– you know, the warm

- up is 4

done first, then the luminance test with different 5

patterns, obviously, the three bar pattern as 6

opposed the IEC broadcast loop. Then we do the 7

power measurement. Presumably, the device , because 8

now it’s at the three bar pattern instead of this 9

IEC pattern, it may have destabilized during that 10

period of time, so if it’s necessary to change the 11

order so that the luminance testing is first, 12

they’re concerned about repeatability, so perhaps it 13

would have to enter another stabilization period 14

with the broadcast loop, and that may be a full 15

hour, ma ybe just to ascertain that two repeatable 16

measurements, I believe, displays

– you

-- Energy 17

Star said, you know, do two ten minute tapes of 18

power measurements. If they’re within two percent 19

of each other, I believe that was the number, then 20

you can take t hem as valid, otherwise you do that 21

perhaps until they do stabilize. But we’re 22

concerned about repeatability of the measurement and 23

so however it gets determined, we’ll put that in. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 59 MR. ROTOLO: Thanks. We will be 1

discussing on mode. The next few slides, I just 2

want to state this, they might be slightly different 3

than in the handouts, there were three additional 4

slides that were viewed later on and we’ll be 5

viewing them directly after this one. 6

So for on mode, the way that this works, 7

and I think Chris briefly talked about this earlier, 8

is that if a TV is shipped with ABC enabled by 9

default, that mode will be tested, the automatic 10

brightness control sensor will be tested with the 11

four proposed luminance levels in addition to the 12

regular on mode test, which is with the sensor 13

disabled if it has it, or just with

– or just with, 14

you know, the as shipped features in home mode. And 15

then if the TV is shipped with it disabled, or there 16

is no sensor, then there’ll be just that one s ingle 17

measurement. 18

And this just is a visual representation 19

of the order a little bit again, and it states the

– 20

it states the levels at which these illuminance 21

measurements will be taken and the tolerance of 22

these measurements. So it’s 10, 50, 100, and 300 23

lux are the illuminance measurements and the 24

tolerance levels are plus or minus one lux, plus or 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 60 minus two lux, plus or minus five lux, and plus or 1

minus nine lux, respectively. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Leave it up there for just 3

a second. I don’t recall see ing that slide. Does 4

that

– 5

MR. ROTOLO: These slides are a few 6

farther back in the presentation. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: I want to make sure they 8

get a chance to look at this. Are we ready to move 9

on? BJ? 10

MR. KUNDU : Are you looking for comments 11

on this? 12

MR. BROOKMAN: We’re going to look for it 13

eventually. 14

MR. ROTOLO: Yeah, there is a comment 15

slide later on, but if you do have any questions now 16

you

– 17

MR. BROOKMAN: You can comment now if you 18

wish. 19

MR. KUNDU : Yes, well, I’m curious about 20

the equal weighting point you have here, that DOE 21

may advise weightings. Again, for

– I guess it’s 22

unclear to me how you’d weight these measurements 23

differently, considering this is a test procedure 24

and you’re not necessarily setting specific on mode 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 61 standards her e. 1

MR. ROTOLO: So at this time and we’ll 2

talk about metric a little bit later, but at this 3

time, in the on mode metric these points are all 4

equally weighted, and so I guess one of the issues 5

that DOE is also requesting comments on is the 6

weighting, if o ne point seems to be seen a bit more 7

than other points, should that point be weighted 8

higher? Do consumers tend to watch their 9

televisions more at the lower end where ten and 50 10

should be weighted higher than 100 or 300? 11

MR. KUNDU : And maybe it’ll beco me clear 12

in later slides, but weighted for what? 13

MR. ROTOLO: So the

– as part of the on 14

mode calculation, you take the power measurement of 15

your ten

– your ten lux measurement, your 50, 100, 16

300

– and then they’re combined by those points 17

being weighted into a final output for your on mode. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic, go ahead. 19

MR. PETROLATI: Yeah, just to be clear. 20

Weighted in accordance with usage profiles to the 21

extent that, if we feel 50 percent of the viewers 22

are actually watching their televisions at ten lux, 23

that might in fact, become a weighting factor. We 24

have not appl ied weighting factors at this point. A 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 62 lot of the data that has recently been gathered may 1

potentially provide us more information in terms of 2

establishing weighting factors, but those are not 3

included at this point, so that’s an area that we 4

will, obviou sly, request stakeholder comment on. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 6

MR. GOLDBERG: So, I mean, I think that 7

the purpose of the procedure is to generate a 8

number, right, and not four numbers, or not a number 9

and an arbitrary illuminance. So I think that this 10

is the right venue to be discussing whether there 11

should be unequal weighting, and if so, what that 12

is, rather than leave it to any downstream regulator 13

to pick numbers. Because if we did it that way, 14

then we would be in a situation where using the DOE 15

test, you come up with different numbers. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: So are you going to 17

describe what the weighting should be? 18

MR. GOLDBERG: Well, I think that’s a 19

separate question, what the weighting should be. I 20

think that if there is to be weighting other than, 21

you know, 25 percent, 25 percent, 25 percent, 25 22

percent, then we should do that here. And if not, 23

then, you know, then we should do that here. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic Petrolati. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 63 MR. PETROLATI: Again, we’ve asked for 1

comment on this area, Doug, and we do have a 2

presentation later on that evaluates the data that 3

has been gathered, and shows what the incidents are 4

of many of these points in terms of the actual 5

usage. We don’t have a different proposal to 6

present today, but we’re hoping to educate those in 7

t erms of all of the data and potentially weighting 8

factors might be applied. And we’re certainly 9

interested in getting your comments. 10

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, what we’re trying to 11

say is, it’s just, from my perspective

– this is 12

Adam Goldberg from Mitsubishi

– from my perspective, 13

as long as the outcome of the DOE test procedure is 14

a number, and not a number that would vary depending 15

on circumstances, that’s good, and we can decide and 16

end up with what

– if there is weighting, and if 17

there is, what it is. An d if the illuminance levels 18

should change, then what they should change to. 19

That’s all fine, as long as first order, we should 20

have a test procedure that generates a number. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, Jon Fairhurst. 23

Yeah, I also suppor t that it’s important that the 24

wattage number that the television manufacture r 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 64 claims, that we claim on the FTC labels, that we 1

claim with EPA, with California and so on, are all 2

the same number. If there’s

– if different agencies 3

or different groups use different numbers, then we 4

could get into a very confusing situation, and even 5

manufacturers could be accused of claiming different 6

things, so having one number that’s published is 7

very, very helpful, I think, for consumers, 8

manufacturers, as well as polic y makers. 9

In addition to that, I’d like to say that 10

if the weightings are slightly pessimistic, in other 11

words, maybe we look at the usage data and we find 12

that there’s much more viewing in low light 13

conditions, but the weightings maybe a little higher 14

t han that for the higher illuminance conditions, 15

that may be appropriate because there will be some 16

users that are going to switch off automatic 17

brightness control. So we don’t know exactly how 18

many that will be, hopefully that will be very few 19

because thi s does save energy. But if it’s a little 20

pessimistic, that’s probably appropriate. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Stephens. 22

MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. I don’t 23

know that our data will help, but some time this 24

summer we may be able to provide you at leas t some 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 65 actual numbers by television make and model number 1

from 100 households where we’ve actually measured 2

the consumption of all of the televisions in those 3

households. And we probably can go back and find 4

out what the settings are, whether they’ve alte red 5

any of the default settings or what they’re 6

operating it in. We will also have the time of day 7

when all of the on hours are, so you’ll at least 8

know whether it’s daytime or nighttime, but we will 9

not have measured the illuminance in the room. But 10

the re may be some data you could test your 11

weightings and potentially see if they reasonably 12

align with the field data that we have on those 13

households, and at least begin to sense if you can 14

meet the terms of the law requiring a test that 15

reasonably approxim ates the energy use in a typical 16

use cycle. 17

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. Yes, 18

Bill. 19

MR. SCHLINDER: This is Bill from 20

Panasonic. We just recently, in a CEA meeting, 21

discussed this very issue, and there is some data, 22

in fact quite a bit of data th rough the CLASP study, 23

and also the CEA study, on home illuminance, the 24

actual values. And we’ve taken as an action plan to 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 66 at least assess what the weighting would be around 1

values such as what we’re talking about

– ten, 50, 2

100, and 300. We could do it around those 3

weightings. We could do it around other weightings 4

or close to that, you know, other values. And it 5

would

– I understand it to be simply adding up the 6

numbers within a range, centered around, let’s say, 7

ten or 50 or 100 lux. It would be qu ite easy to do. 8

So that’s what we plan on at least performing that 9

study. It should be quite easy to do, given the 10

fact that CLASP , NCEA already has data. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Additional 12

comments in this stream. We’re going to keep 13

pressing on w ith the next slides. 14

MR. ROTOLO: Okay. So as part of the on 15

mode test, the luminance test or the illuminance 16

test, DOE is proposing a direct method of simulating 17

the illuminance levels with the ABC sensor. DOE is 18

proposing to shine the light source di rectly on the 19

ABC sensor and having that value measured directly 20

at the sensor’s location. But DOE is also 21

interested

– we’ve explored diffuse light, but DOE 22

is also interested in stakeholder comments in using 23

diffuse light sources. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: I thi nk we’ve now jumped 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 67 ahead to slide 60 or so? 1

MR. ROTOLO: Yeah. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: So

– I just want to make 3

sure that they can follow where they’re sitting. 59 4

or so. And those intermediary slides, are they

– 5

are you going to cover those? 6

MR. ROTOLO: Yeah, we’ll address those 7

after, and those

– we briefly spoke about those. 8

Those are more to do with the different illuminance 9

levels and research that was being done in reaction 10

to possible other illuminance levels. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: I just want to make s ure 12

everybody can follow where you are. Okay, now that 13

we’ve got that

– yes, Jon

. 14

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. So we very 15

much support using a simple test procedure of direct 16

light. With diffuse light the

– trying to get a 17

lambursion (ph) source is

– which is a evenly 18

distributed light

– is very, very difficult. So we 19

prefer the simpler, direct method. But we should 20

also note that tends to be more difficult for the 21

manufacturers in terms of the power rating. And the 22

reason is that when we measure the light with

– in 23

the different surveys, so both CLASP , CEA and DOE as 24

well

– we tend to use the light sensors with domes 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 68 in front of the bezel. Actual implementation will 1

typically have a flat diffuser that’s very small, 2

with a recessed sensor. So the television sensors 3

are actually much more directed, so in other words, 4

they see light very well straight ahead, off axis 5

light, maybe not as well as the light sensors that 6

we’ve used in the measurements. So what we’re going 7

to see is if you wish to appro ximate, let’s say, a 8

50 lux household, so you’ve tested it with your 9

light meter, you say 50 lux. When you shine

– if 10

you have in that household, if you looked at the 11

reading in the television with that diffuse light 12

compared to the direct light, the dire ct light will 13

be read higher in the television. So it’s going to 14

be a bit pessimistic. In other words, we’re going 15

to show higher power levels typically with the 16

direct light testing. However, because of the 17

complexity of moving away from a direct light 18

source, Sharp anyways, does support using the direct 19

light source, but be aware that it is going to be 20

more pessimistic. In other words, the television is 21

going to think the room is brighter than maybe how 22

we’ve designed it to be. But because of the nee d 23

for simplicity, repeatability, and so forth, I think 24

that’s what Sharp anyway acknowledges that we need 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 69 to accept. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: How

-- can you quantify 2

that? 3

MR. FAIRHURST: No, it’s too complex. It 4

varies by make, model, manufacturer. 5

MR. BROOK MAN: Adam. 6

MR. GOLDBERG: So

– Adam Goldberg from 7

Mitsubishi. I think that, you know, fundamentally 8

what Jon is saying is that a light meter is built to 9

be a light meter, and a television is built

– the 10

ABC aspect of a television is not built to be an 11

accurate light meter. It’s meant to perform it’s 12

function, right. So the performance of the things 13

is going to be a little bit different. 14

I’m curious how much investigation DOE has 15

done in terms of how difficult it actually is to 16

construct a diffuse light situation. There’s 17

significant collection of products that’s easily 18

available commercially for ... lighting with the 19

umbrella diffusers and things like that that would, 20

in an effective and not terribly expensive way, can 21

produce some pretty good diffuse light that might 22

avoid the sorts of issues that Jon is mentioning, 23

and still yield a repeatable and not overly costly 24

environment. I don’t h ave any specific suggestions 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 70 today, but maybe I will in a couple weeks when we 1

submit comments. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Bill? Bill, 3

get that a little closer to you, will you please? 4

MR. SCHLINDER: Sure. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 6

MR. SCHLIN DER: Again, I think I made two 7

or three comments today about repeatability. The 8

factory is very, very concerned about repeatability 9

and the direct lighting, as Jon indicated, is the 10

way of guaranteeing that. Yes, there are some down 11

sides in terms of ca librating direct lighting, 12

compared to what you find in the room, but the 13

factory is also saying well, yeah, but whose room 14

are we talking about? This room with fluorescent 15

lights coming down from the ceiling, or a room where 16

you have situational lights b ehind sofas and things? 17

How are we ever going to calibrate diffuse lighting 18

to be real light? It varies on home to home. There 19

is no study right now. Was it light coming in 20

through a window? Shining on the TV? Or was it 21

nighttime with three lights off to the side? So 22

they’re saying it’s basically, from a repeatability 23

standpoint, the direct light as you specified, is 24

really their recommendation as well, which is, of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 71 course, what they’ve been doing in their test 1

laboratories for some time. 2

MR. BROOKM AN: Okay. Vic. 3

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, I’ll ask this of Jon , 4

but it’s to all the manufacturers. From what I 5

remember, CEA 2037 didn’t necessarily identify the 6

lighting source originally. And I believe that 7

you’re working on an update to CEA 2037. Is the re a 8

chance that you can describe what the recommendation 9

will be in the update concerning the lighting source 10

and how it should be used in the measurement. 11

MR. FAIRHURST: Right. First of all, in 12

IEC it just says directly into the sensor. And so 13

that’ s

– I believe that’s the prevailing consensus 14

that I’ve heard in the meetings is also directly 15

into the sensor. In fact, I’m sure of it. That’s 16

been the consensus in the meetings, rather than go 17

to direct light source, precisely for the reasons 18

that Bill stated. And in addition, as Adam 19

mentioned, there are many inexpensive ways to get 20

diffuse light, but unless you specify one device 21

from one manufacturer, the diffusion with soft boxes 22

and so forth, varies from manufacturer to 23

manufacturer. It’s not specified, typically, with 24

those products. And so, so to actually develop a 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 72 consistent diffuse light source with the fall off

– 1

calibrated fall off would be very difficult. So the 2

intent is to stay with the directly into the sensor 3

type of specification. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Is CEA working on an 5

update? 6

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, CEA is actively 7

working on an update. I’m the co

- chair for that. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: And the time horizon for 9

that would be? 10

MR. FAIRHURST: We’re hoping to get the 11

standard ready for our four approval, that’s the 12

next level up above our workgroup, in the May 13

timeframe. Then there would be voting, 30 day 14

voting typically, depending on comments and 15

publications, it would be some months after that. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: Maybe the summertime? 17

MR. FAIRHURST: Possibly in the 18

s ummertime, yes. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 20

Additional comments on this? Okay. 21

MR. ROTOLO: Additionally, DOE is 22

recommending a 100 watt equivalent incandescent 23

halogen light source for their illuminance light 24

source. DOE recognizes that ther e is many other 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 73 types of light sources and would like to request 1

comments on using additional light sources. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Jon

. 3

MR. FAIRHURST: I’ll just say quickly that 4

it is important that we have a light with a 5

continuous spectral distributio n as indicated. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: As recommended here. Thank 7

you. No additional comments. 8

MR. ROTOLO: I believe we already touched 9

on this, but

– so at this time I would like to move 10

over to Louis Deroches or are we going to break 11

right now? 12

MR. BR OOKMAN: Yeah, I think now’s a good 13

time for a break. Yeah, let’s take a break. Thank 14

you. 15

MR. ROTOLO: Thank you. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: It’s now 10:45, we’ve 17

covered a lot of ground. It’s been very, very 18

useful comment from the stakeholders present, s o 19

thank you for that. And thanks again for those 20

joining us via the internet. We’re going to take a 21

15 minute break . H ere in the Forestall building , 22

you must wear your badge inside the building, so 23

make sure you’ve got that with you

. There are rest 24

roo ms at both ends of the hall. The coffee shop is 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 74 on the ground floor

. 1

(Whereupon, at 10: 47 a.m., the meeting was 2

recessed for a 1 9 minute period.) 3

MR. BROOKMAN: So let’s start back up. So 4

we’re going to continue where we left off. 5

**Background Research on Room Illuminance**  6

MR. DESROCHES: I’m going to describe the 7

background research that was done on room 8

illuminance. And just a bit of a background here. 9

Testing with ABC enabled is currently required as 10

part of the IEC and Energy Star program s, so TVs 11

shipped with ABC enabled by default, both are a 12

separate test, and DOE did request comment on 13

incorporating such a test in its request for 14

information. And in general, interested parties 15

supported the adoption of this test procedure, and 16

in part icular, to make this test procedure 17

repeatable and representative. And so that was why 18

DOE is proposing to incorporate a test procedure for 19

TVs with automatic brightness control enabled by 20

default. 21

Just to clarify the conversation a little 22

bit. The aut omatic brightness control is a power 23

saving feature in which the screen luminance in 24

candelas per meter squared is adjusted based on the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 75 ambient room illuminance in lux. And luminance is a 1

directional measure and illuminance is an integrated 2

measure. And there’s a clear relationship between 3

the TV luminance and the power that it consumes. 4

The television’s total power is largely 5

domina ted by the production of light, and on this 6

graph here you can see the bottom here is room 7

illuminance, and on the left axis there’s a measure 8

of power, and that’s the blue line on the graph. On 9

the right axis, there’s the luminance of the 10

television and that’s the red line on the graph. 11

And so you can see

– and this is just for an example 12

television

– that as the luminance of the television 13

changes as a function of the room condition, the 14

luminance goes up and the power responds 15

accordingly. There is a base load power that is 16

used by the television for non

- light purposes, but 17

the change in the power is clearly driven by the 18

luminance changes in the television. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Just a program note. We’ve 20

now gone back in the slides, and we’re now back to 21

slide 44 in your packet, so you can find where we 22

are. Okay. 23

MR. DESROCHES: So this slide here is a 24

representation of a theoretical ABC response and how 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 76 it would work best for the user. On the X axis 1

again, is room illuminance in lux , and on the Y axis 2

is an arbitrary TV luminance axis. And the point of 3

this slide is to show that when you are in darkened 4

conditions, shown on the very left there, that the 5

TV luminance doesn’t have to be as bright for the 6

user to have a good viewing experience, and t hen as 7

the room gets brighter and brighter, the TV 8

luminance will increase and eventually you get to 9

some very bright condition, brighter than typical 10

conditions, and the TV luminance will max out. 11

Because the human eye has a logarithmic 12

response to ligh t, this change does not have to be 13

linear, and this is, as you can see here from the S

14

shaped curve, that as the room illuminance gets 15

brighter and brighter, it take successively larger 16

and larger steps in room illuminance to achieve what 17

the human eye per ceives as an equal doubling in 18

brightness. And at the top here of the graph, you 19

see these numbers of eight, 16, 32, 64, and so on. 20

Those are successive doublings of room illuminance, 21

so this is just to guide you as to what the eye 22

would perceive as a do ubling of light. And so the 23

typical response curve should follow this natural 24

response of the human eye. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 77 The exact TV luminance values that occur 1

at the lowest room illuminance settings. There are 2

organizations like the Imaging Science Foundation 3

and product review organizations like CNET, that 4

have recommended levels at the low end. And there 5

are some studies as indicated here like the Masumoto 6

2011 study that looked into consumer preferences at 7

the bright end. And so there are data points 8

available for what is considered to be an 9

appropriate TV luminance at the low end and at the 10

high end. But in general, what is important is this 11

gradual response curve. 12

So currently the ABC test requires testing 13

at zero lux, and at greater than 300 lux. And the re 14

was a recent study, and the full citation is down 15

below, there’s a recent study that demonstrated that 16

the automatic brightness control response in some 17

televisions is often implemented in a manner that 18

does not take full advantage of the ABC savings, s o 19

it is not only not saving energy, but it’s not 20

providing the user experience that I was just 21

describing before, which is ideal for the consumer. 22

And in many cases, the luminance at zero lux is very 23

dim, and is unwatchably dim. 24

Some TVs in this study d id show this 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 78 gradual response curve, and some had a very steep 1

step function as part of their ABC implementation. 2

And so as a result, measuring at only zero lux and 3

300 lux may result in an energy consumption reported 4

value that is not indicative of actua l use. 5

And in addition to all of this, the actual 6

room illuminance in homes has been, until very 7

recently, uncertain. There have been some recent 8

studies that have just been made available and that 9

provided us some preliminary results and I will 10

discuss that in a moment. 11

So DOE decided to do some additional 12

testing to complement that earlier study to see if 13

those trends held. The next three slides, I will 14

show the results of those tests. This testing 15

occurred over the last year and a half or so. I t 16

included televisions of 2010 and 2011 model years. 17

It included a range of sizes and a range of 18

manufacturers and a range of technologies. In 19

addition, there was testing that was performed by 20

CLASP and as well there’s some testing performed by 21

EPA as pa rt of the Energy Star program. And so what 22

is shown here is a compilation of all these recent 23

tests. 24

Shown on this graph here are the response 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 79 curves of the smaller televisions, from the 23 to 1

42

- inch category, and you can see that there is, 2

again, the re is a mix of response. And I’ll use the 3

cursor here for a second here. So this red line 4

here, for example, is an example of the television 5

that is responding in a gradual fashion and is 6

increasing as the room illuminance increases; and at 7

the same time the television, such as this purple 8

line here, which is responding in a very step

- like 9

fashion. I apologize

– this one here

– is 10

responding in a very step

- like fashion. And so 11

there is again, there appears to be two basic 12

approaches to ABC, there is the gradual approach and 13

a step approach. 14

One thing I just want to note very quickly 15

is that the testing that was performed by DOE, by 16

Energy Star, and by CLASP , this is

– these are 17

different test

– they were tested at different 18

points, the room illuminance points, and so that’s 19

why not every curve here has all the points on them. 20

And another note I want to make here is that the 21

lines that are connecting the points here, they’re 22

just here for clarity. DOE is not making any 23

assumptions about what the behavi or of the ABC 24

response is between these. This is not 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 80 interpolation, this is just meant to guide the eye 1

as to where the points are connected. 2

MR. FAIRHURST: This is Jon Fairhurst from 3

Sharp. One concern I have about the way that this 4

is drawn is that some of the televisions are not 5

tested at 100 lux, and so it implies that saturation 6

often doesn’t occur until 150 lux, but I believe 7

that most of the TVs shown that were tested at 100 8

lux are at or very near saturation. So can DOE 9

respond to that? 10

MR. DESROCHES: Yeah, and I will show this 11

in the next two slides as well. I believe it’s the 12

CLASP study did not measure at 100 lux, and so we 13

can’t say anything about that. For the DOE tests 14

that were conducted at 100 lux, there actually is a 15

fair number o f televisions that are not saturated at 16

100, and that the maximum brightness does occur at a 17

later stage. And I’ll show some examples of that. 18

The other thing I want to mention, too, is 19

the CLASP study did not measure at zero lux and so 20

for those televi sions we make no assumptions of the 21

behavior at zero, so it’s just not on the graph. 22

This is the same as the previous slide, 23

but this is now in the 46 to 47 inch category, and 24

again, this is a combination of tests by the three 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 81 organizations. There is on ce again a general trend 1

of having two response curves, such as this orange 2

one here gradually increases, and then there are a 3

handful of step functions as shown here. In one 4

case there was this unusual response of a gradual 5

increase and then at 300 lux, the television dropped 6

quite significantly in luminance. And again, just 7

to clarify, this

– what I’m showing here is power 8

consumption, but as I just showed before, there is a 9

connection between power and luminance. 10

MR. GOLDBERG : (off mic) You mean an LED 11

lit, LCD TV? 12

MR. DESROCHES: That’s correct. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Use your microphone. 14

That’s okay. 15

MR. DESROCHES: So the comment was whether 16

LED represents an LED/LCD TV, and yes, it does. 17

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 18

MR. DESROCHES: And a CCFL i s a CCFL LCD 19

TV. And so to answer an earlier question, this is 20

an example here of a television whose measured value 21

at 100 lux and 150 and 300, indicates that the 100 22

is not saturating, and there’s another example here 23

of the orange line, the television b eing measured at 24

100 and then being measured again at 150 and then 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 82 300, and so 100 is not

– the ABC sensor is not being 1

saturated at 100 lux necessarily. 2

This slide is again showing a similar 3

pattern for the larger televisions. This is 51 inch 4

and larger. Again, there’s a mix of technologies 5

and these data come from various organizations. And 6

again there is the same

– there are a number here of 7

step functions, like this red one here, but there 8

are examples in a larger category of some of the 9

more gradual response functions, and you can see 10

some down here. And again, there is an example here 11

of a television whose value at 100 lux is lower than 12

the value at 150 and the 300. Similarly for this 13

red one. 14

And so, in summary, of the testing that 15

was d one recently, this seems to support what was 16

done in the earlier study and that there appears to 17

be two basic approaches to ABC. I’m showing on the 18

left here, at the top, is the gradual response 19

approach of some televisions and on the right there 20

is the s tep function approach of some televisions. 21

And when the ABC approach is utilized in a gradual 22

fashion, there is significant power savings that are 23

possible. 24

The 100 lux does not necessarily represent 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 83 ABC sensor saturation for all televisions. There 1

are examples of a few televisions that do not 2

saturate at 100. Three hundred lux does generally 3

represent ABC saturation. There are a few examples 4

here and there

– there was that one example that 5

turned o ver at 300 lux, but overall, 300 lux is 6

representative of the maximum TV luminance. And 7

when tested at zero lux, there are some televisions 8

that are sometimes very, very dim, and shown here on 9

the top right is an example of such a television. 10

So again, now I’m showing power and 11

luminance again. So blue is power and red is 12

luminance. And on the television on the right here, 13

the luminance point, if you look on the right axis, 14

is under 25 nits, and that is incredibly dim, and 15

the user would find that to be unwatchably dim. 16

Question? 17

MR. KUNDU : Yes, Bijit Kundu with Energy 18

Solutions. Does DOE know what’s going on with some 19

of the

– the few exceptions of power decreasing at 20

300 lux, or maybe some of the manufacturers in the 21

room could answer what’s goi ng on there? 22

MR. DESROCHES: I’m not going to comment 23

as to what the manufacturers are or are not doing, 24

but the test

– that test was repeatable, and it was 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 84 verified that the response at 300 was going down, 1

the TV was getting dimmer. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic , please. 3

MR. PETROLATI: Yes. Again, we have a 4

test procedure that measures, currently, at zero and 5

300 lux. And I would assume that it’s trying to get 6

the maximum value of maximum value of produced 7

energy consumption by that approach, because it 8

cert ainly doesn’t seem like that would be a benefit 9

to the consumer to have significantly reduced 10

luminance levels of the television at a room 11

condition of 300 lux. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 13

MR. GOLDBERG: This is Adam Goldberg from 14

Mitsubishi. I have no idea what we would be 15

thinking, but I think I agree with what Vic just 16

said that it would seem that constructing a set that 17

decreased its luminance in bright situations would 18

be a set that would be poorly reviewed and yield 19

poor performance and poor marketplace 20

characteristics. But I have no idea. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. It’s 23

possible that no matter where we put ABC points to 24

be measured, that the manufacturer could reduce the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 85 performance of the television set at those points in 1

order to maximize the score, without necessarily 2

saving the power that would be represented by the 3

score. We had had, in the development of the new 4

CEA 2037 standard, some discussion of ways to 5

mitigate that, especially where it turns over. 6

There are pos sibly ways towards standard such that 7

you measure at a given level, or the highest power 8

consuming level between that and the previous step, 9

such that non

- increasing monotonic televisions like 10

that, in other words, any time it turns over, could 11

be potentia lly avoided in the wording. A 12

manufacturer that does not play games like that 13

would not have to do any additional testing to 14

verify it, knowing the nature of the design, while

– 15

and it would also take away motivation for 16

manufacturers to do such things in the future. So 17

there are ways to mitigate that without necessarily 18

testing many, many points, or requiring that of all 19

manufacturers. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic. 21

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, Jon , we’d be very 22

interested in getting this type of language or an 23

alterna tive approach that might be used in terms of 24

the way this is structured, in terms of the way 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 86 ABC’s response should be measured. Thank you. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. And CEA is working 2

on this also, Jon ? 3

MR. FAIRHURST: We had discussed that. 4

The standa rd is still in development, and of course 5

whatever we come up with is still subject to voting 6

within our four committees. So what exactly will 7

come out at the end, as a CEA approved standard, I 8

can’t say anything there yet, but the

– we’ve had 9

that discus sion as a possible solution. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Additional questions 11

on these curves, these illustrations? 12

MR. DESROCHES: This summary table is just 13

included for your benefit for future reference, and 14

for reference during the presentation, but this is 15

the summary of all the testing that was done on the 16

previous three slides. 17

MR. BROOKMAN: And the actual data points. 18

MR. DESROCHES: And the actual data 19

points. And the highlighting is just to show that 20

some televisions were tested at different t est 21

pattern

– test points than other televisions. 22

So now I’m just going to switch to

– from 23

the testing of the televisions to the room 24

illuminance testing that was done. So prior to 2011 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 87 there was very limited data on what the 1

representative room illumin ance values were in 2

homes. In mid

- 2011, there was a study that was 3

published, based in Japan, on the common room 4

illuminance values found in about 77 homes. On the 5

right here are the two main graphs that show the 6

results. 7

So on the X axis here are vario us bins of 8

room illuminance, and then on the left axis here is 9

the frequency of each bin, and on the right axis 10

here is the cumulative frequency as you step up in 11

room illuminance. And so

– and this is for both the 12

day, on the top, and the night, on the b ottom. 13

And there are two major findings from this 14

Japanese study. One is that the bin of 50 to 75 lux 15

or so was the most common in both day and night, and 16

the other major finding is that more

– at least 50 17

percent or more of the results were at 100 lu x or 18

less. And so if you follow this cumulative 19

distribution to about 50, to represent 50 percent, 20

you’re at about 100 lux or less, and the night, that 21

50 percent is reached at a much lower value. So 22

these are the results in Japan for a set of Japanese 23

h omes, and they’re not necessarily indicative of US 24

homes. Japanese consumers may have different 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 88 lighting preferences than US consumers. And so this 1

is the first data available, but not necessarily 2

representative. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Jon

. 4

MR. FAIRHURS T: Yeah, Jon Fairhurst. Do 5

you know the location of the meter during these 6

tests? Were they in the middle of the room or on 7

the television bezel as has been done in the other 8

tests? 9

MR. DESROCHES: I believe they were on the 10

bezel. 11

MR. FAIRHURST: T hank you. 12

MR. PETROLATI: My understanding is 13

though, they were on the top bezel of the 14

television, rather than the bottom. 15

MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks, Vic. Yes, Bill. 16

MR. SCHLINDER: Actually I’ve been told by 17

many, many Japanese over the years that they tend to 18

use fluorescent lighting in their homes. They like 19

brighter homes than American, and we actually had, 20

through an IEC meeting, a gentleman from Korea that 21

said that the CLASP a nd CEA data was dimmer than 22

what he felt Korean homes use, so there may be a 23

difference, obviously, internationally. I just 24

wanted to point that out. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 89 MR. DESROCHES: And we agree with that 1

statement. 2

So after this Japanese study was 3

published, there h ave been some recent US studies. 4

Lawrence Berkeley Lab conducted a pilot study. It 5

involved only nine homes. It was just a pilot 6

study. These homes were in California and in 7

Colorado. And the measurements were taken between 8

May and June of last year, and the methodology was 9

to have simultaneous metering of both the television 10

power and room illuminance at ten minute intervals 11

for a period of about one or two weeks in each home. 12

The room illuminance meter was on the bottom bezel 13

of the television, and the simultaneous metering of 14

the television power was used so that you could 15

correlate what the room illuminance value was when 16

the television was actually being used. 17

Shortly after, CLASP also conducted a 18

study on room illuminance. This study was over 60 19

homes. It was in two cities in California and in 20

DC. It was over October and November timeframe of 21

last year, and again, the methodology was to have a 22

simultaneous metering of both the television power 23

and room illuminance. This time it was at five 24

m inute intervals and it was again over a period of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 90 about one or two weeks per home. 1

And there’s also the CEA/C EDIA study that 2

included 234 homes, although some of those 3

measurements were excluded, and the locations were 4

varied, but the majority were in Ca lifornia as well. 5

And this was conducted over September and December 6

of last year, and this study had a one

- time spot 7

measurement of room illuminance, but the room was 8

arranged as if the viewer would be watching 9

television. 10

This is just a quick check to see if the 11

three studies that have been conducted so far are 12

representative of actual use, and so on the left 13

there is the American Time Use Survey from the 14

Bureau of Labor Statistics, which tracks usage 15

behavior for a variety of different activities. An d 16

this is just a histogram of when consumers watch 17

television, generally, as a function of the day. So 18

on the X axis here, is

– so this is just the hour of 19

the day down here, from zero to 24, and then the 20

frequency. So very clearly people are watching 21

te levision most prominently in the later afternoon, 22

early evening kind of prime time hours, and so we 23

wanted to check to see if three luminance studies 24

were at least matching those conditions. And indeed 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 91 for the most part, all three are showing a peak in 1

th e nighttime. All three have some issues 2

associated with them, none of them is perfect. The 3

CLASP distribution actually has quite a bit more of 4

the measurements taken during the day, and so it 5

perhaps is a bit biased toward daytime viewing. The 6

LBL study was just a pilot and has a very limited 7

sample, and so the distribution is very 8

discontinuous. And the CEA is very biased towards 9

the evening hours. And so none of the three studies 10

are perfect, but all three are at least indicative 11

of, and representati ve of the dominant use which is 12

in the evening. 13

MR. FAIRHURST: For the

-- r egarding the 14

CEA study, in the group that led this, we did have 15

DOE participation, and we were actually requested to 16

focus on the evening viewing, so that was exactly 17

what we did, and actually it was very appropriate 18

because we didn’t do the continuous sampling the way 19

the CLASP did, so it’s actually very complementary. 20

CEA measured more homes, and because there are only 21

a few modes where the lighting is typically going to 22

be in a home at night, that’s very appropriate to 23

test more homes. With CLASP it did the more 24

co ntinuous measurements so they actually have the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 92 more, I think, definitive data for the daytime 1

viewing. So between them, they complement each 2

other well. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Charlie. 4

MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. ... data, 5

this summer I think we’ll be able to give you 6

another distribution that will, perhaps, fill in the 7

holes or confirm one or another of these. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 9

MR. DESROCHES: So this slide here is 10

representative of the results, and I’ll spend a 11

little bit of ti me on this. So what is shown here 12

on the X axis is the room illuminance, and this is 13

on a logarithmic plot, so a lux of one is

– so on 14

the axis here, is the room illuminance, a lux of one 15

here, and ten, and 100 and so on. And what’s being 16

plotted is the cumulative distribution of all the 17

data. So the data have been ordered and you’re just 18

getting the cumulative distribution. 19

There’s a slight difference between the 20

CEA and CLASP and LBL because the CEA

– sorry, the 21

CLASP and LBL studies are taken at ce rtain 22

intervals, and so there is this cumulative

– there’s 23

a lot of data points in this cumulative 24

distribution. And the CEA are one time measurements 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 93 over a lot of homes. And so the cumulative 1

distributions are not directly comparable, but they 2

are simi lar and they’re just being shown in the same 3

graph here for comparison. 4

Also on this graph, I’m just indicating 5

for your benefit here, this line here represents the 6

25th percentile of the cumulative distribution, and 7

this line here represents the 50th pe rcentile of the 8

distribution, and the 75th percentile of the 9

distribution. And this is separating the cumulative 10

distribution into four quartiles just for easy 11

comparison here. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Matt. 13

MR. MALINOWSKI: This is Matt Malinowski, 14

ICF. Are y ou plotting the raw data or is that

– is 15

this the data normalized by the BLS? 16

MR. DESROCHES: This is raw. This is all 17

raw. 18

MR. MALINOWSKI: Did you do that at all? 19

MR. DESROCHES: The? 20

MR. MALINOWSKI: Normalize the data by the 21

BLS? 22

MR. DESROCH ES: No, we didn’t. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 24

MR. GOLDBERG: Adam Goldberg from 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 94 Mitsubishi. One last clarification. The table on 1

the right hand side, just verify that I’m reading 2

this right. That says, for example, that half the 3

viewing hours were, under the CEA study, at 13.3 lux 4

or less, is that right? 5

MR. DESROCHES: That’s correct. And I was 6

just about to get to that. The way to read that is, 7

as you step up in the cumulative distribution, the 8

three studies are there and so this is the 9

percentage o f

– so, as you said, if you move to the 10

50 percent distribution, the CEA suggests that half 11

of the measurements are at 13.3 lux or less, 15.1 or 12

less for CLASP and 16 for LBL. So as you move up 13

the distribution, you’re going to go up in the lux 14

values tha t are less than that. 15

A couple things I just wanted to highlight 16

is the only

– the LBL and the CEA data recorded 17

integer values of lux, but the CLASP study recorded 18

the lux values to two decimal places, and so that’s 19

why it is extending pretty far down t here. The 20

CLASP study recorded 0.00 lux so, as best as it 21

could identify exactly zero lux, in only point two 22

percent of all cases. Everything else was at least 23

.01 lux or higher. And in particular, there was a 24

significant amount of viewing that occurred above 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 95 point one lux, but the viewing at zero lux, at 1

exactly zero lux, was actually an extreme condition. 2

The other thing to note is where this 3

cumulative distribution is rising the fastest, which 4

is right around here. This is between , say, ten and 5

15 lux. Yeah. 6

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, this is Adam for 7

Mitsubishi. Do we know any information about the 8

meters used by, for example, CLASP? I mean, it’s 9

nearly impossible to construct a dark room, and it’s 10

nearly impossible to measure lux in the hundredths 11

of a lux range. I wonder if we know what they were 12

using. Or perhaps, it might make sense to not pay 13

too much attention to things less than a couple lux. 14

MR. DESROCHES: They do list the meters 15

that they used in their report. 16

So one thing

– just fro m some anecdotal 17

testing that we’ve done, we do find it very 18

difficult to actually reproduce zero lux in a 19

darkroom condition because even the television being 20

on, that the room will reflect some of that 21

television light off ceiling, off the furniture, off 22

even the clothing, so having a perfectly zero lux 23

measurement was very difficult to achieve just 24

anecdotally

– with a very high precision instrument. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 96 So what I was just going to highlight is 1

this area here is the quickest rise in the 2

cumulative distribution that represents where the 3

most common, most likely value would be. It’s 4

between ten and 15 lux or so is where you would have 5

the peak of all these measurements , and I’ll show 6

this on the next slide in a different way to 7

highlight this. 8

And then by the time you get to about 100 9

lux or so, you’re about 85 percent or so of all the 10

measurements are at 100 lux or less, and by the time 11

you get to 300 lux , there’s only

– there’s less than 12

five percent of the data that are at 300 lux or 13

above. 14

Very quickly, the CLASP study, at the 15

bottom here, tends to show slightly darker 16

conditions than for instance, the LBL study. That’s 17

perhaps explained by the fact that the CLASP study 18

was taken during the fall and winter months, whereas 19

the LBL study was done during May and June, and so 20

the daylight conditions would be longer and 21

typically brighter during the summer. And so that 22

may be a possible explanation for w hy it’s slightly 23

darker in the CLASP study. And similarly, the CEA 24

curve at the top is a little bit darker than some of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 97 the other ones, and again the CEA study was designed 1

to be primarily in the evening, and so that is 2

possibly explaining why the CEA dat a are showing 3

slightly darker conditions at the high end. 4

But overall, despite the differences 5

between the three studies, despite their relative 6

limitations, they are showing a consistent picture 7

of what is happening in room illuminance in US 8

homes, an d they are in reasonable agreement with 9

each other. 10

This is the same data just represented 11

slightly differently. We’re just showing here the 12

distribution in bins of room illuminance, and these 13

bins are logarithmic bins, and so the spacing of the 14

bin get s bigger as you increase in room illuminance, 15

and again, this is to reflect the sensitivity of the 16

human eye and its logarithmic response. And again, 17

you can clearly see that the peak of this 18

distribution is in the eight to 16 lux bin or so, 19

and that is c onsistent across all three studies. So 20

there are some differences between the studies, but 21

they are showing the same rough picture. 22

There’s also a secondary peak at the very 23

low condition, between zero and one, so that does 24

represent a condition that ma ny viewers do watch 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 98 television in, and there is a fairly large tail at 1

higher lux conditions as well. 2

So just a summary of what I’ve mentioned. 3

The zero lux condition appears to be an extreme 4

condition that in the CLASP data it occurs at less 5

than point two percent of all data. And the 300 lux 6

is also at the high end, and less than five percent 7

of the data are at 300 lux or greater. The peak of 8

the distribution appears to occur between ten and 15 9

lux or so, depending on the individual data set, and 10

rou ghly about 30 percent of all the data in all 11

three studies are at ten lux or less, and about 75 12

percent of all the data are at 50 lux or less. And 13

about 85 percent of all the data are at 100 lux or 14

less. And

– let me just finish my point

– and then 15

for f uture home illuminance studies, if there are 16

other rounds of this study, they should attempt to 17

have a more representative household sample to 18

ensure geographic diversity, to ensure that the span 19

of dates in that sample include various seasons to 20

account f or any seasonal effects, and to make sure 21

to appropriately measure weekday and weekend 22

television viewing. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 24

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, regar d ing zero lux, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 99 while exactly zero lux is extreme conditions, in 1

fact might be impossible in that y ou need to be at 2

zero Kelvin to be at true zero lux,

-- 3

MR. BROOKMAN: The other ideal test 4

condition. 5

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah. There is a strong 6

peak. In fact, if you look at the CLASP data for 7

nighttime conditions, the area around zero lux is 8

actually the highest peak in the CLASP data, so I 9

think it’s a little misleading when you say that 10

zero lux is less than two percent. While factually 11

true, it might make people say, oh, well no one’s 12

watching TV in near dark conditions, but that’s 13

actually very c ommon. 14

Another thing I’d like to mention is I 15

believe all the CLASP measurements were done in the 16

primary viewing room. 17

MR. DESROCHES: That’s correct. 18

MR. FAIRHURST: While in CEA we had a 19

significant number of bedrooms tested as well. And 20

many p eople do watch TVs in their bedrooms in fully 21

dark conditions. So we also showed a very strong 22

peak in the CEA data in bedrooms near zero lux. 23

MR. DESROCHES: Just a quick follow up on 24

that. I would agree with all those comments, and 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 100 there is a peak in the distribution here at the low 1

lux, and the only point here is the recording of 2

exactly zero was an extreme condition. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Stephens. 4

MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. One of 5

the things that our data will probably have that may 6

hel p fill this in is that we actually are, in all of 7

the houses we are measuring television use, we’re 8

doing all of the televisions everywhere, and so 9

we’ll have actually the fraction of hours of 10

television use in each household, along with all the 11

demographi c data on these households, for all of the 12

televisions, so you’ll know how much is in bedrooms 13

and how much is in the family room or the TV room or 14

everything else, and we might be able to get a sense 15

of that, how to weight these things. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: P lease, Bill. 17

MR. SCHLINDER: Bill from Panasonic. 18

Again whether it’s zero lux or one lux or something 19

in between, the reason the IEC favored the zero lux 20

measurement was ease and repeatability of the 21

measurement. One simply takes a piece of tape, 22

black tape, and covers the sensor, and makes the 23

measurement. So whether we include other 24

measurements like ten or 50 or 100 or whatever, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 101 that’s great, but in order to overall reduce the 1

variance in the combined average, we support putting 2

zero

– as well as 30 0, because 300, on the other end 3

of the spectrum, is very repeatable in that we’re 4

pretty sure that most of the TVs if not all, will be 5

saturated and producing the greatest brightness at 6

that point, so it gives us an easy, repeatable 7

measurement at zero, t he 300. And then there may be 8

others in between, but those others being in that 9

active range will be varying depending on the 10

tolerance of these sensors, the tolerance of the 11

light meters, and other conditions of the test. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Vi c. 13

MR. PETROLATI: Bill, just to follow up on 14

that. We obviously realize harmonization is a major 15

issue for manufacturers. If we went forward with 16

our points that were in the NOPR, ten, 50 , 100, 300, 17

would you be required to do any additional testing 18

f or selling TVs in North America beyond those 19

points? 20

MR. SCHLINDER: I’m Bill, responding to 21

Vic. We probably

– you know that represents four 22

points, okay, whereas there were just two points, so 23

I think that’s more than adequate in terms of 24

characterizi ng the ABC. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 102 MR. PETROLATI: Right. 1

MR. SCHLINDER: The only issue is the 2

repeatability of the measurements, in that three of 3

those, the ten, 50 and 100 would be an actively 4

changing part of the ABC circuit. What I mean by 5

that is it’s very sensitive t o variations in the 6

measurement lux that it’s receiving. Furthermore, 7

the circuits themselves, these are not light meters. 8

These are inexpensive sensors for consumer 9

electronics. They’re not calibrated the same way you 10

would calibrate with an adjustment, a light meter. 11

Those are all calibrated instruments. Consumer 12

televisions generally, from a price standpoint, are 13

not going to go through that elaborate calibration 14

cost. So as a result, there will be repeatability 15

variance, and the more you have measu rements in that 16

active range, the worse it becomes. And, we, from 17

verification purposes, are very concerned about 18

that. That’s why we at least recommend the zero 19

point, because you lock it down. It really takes 20

the sensor out of the picture. It’s your minimum 21

brightness. The 300 lux is your saturation point 22

for sure, it takes that out. So now what you’re 23

left with is the points in between, which will have 24

that variability. But the points that you 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 103 identified more than characterized the system. Four 1

p oints as opposed to two. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Please. 3

MR. CALWELL: Chris Calwell from Ec ova. I 4

wanted to try to get a little more detail if we 5

could on the discussion between Jon and Louis about 6

the really low lux conditions. And so, I wonder if 7

there are any other differences in the studies that 8

could account for the different prevalence that 9

we’re seeing. And Louis, you had said something 10

earlier about the extent to which powe r metering was 11

occurring during light measurement. So I wanted to 12

make sure I understood. In all three cases, did we 13

know that the television was on when the power 14

measurements were taken? 15

MR. DESROCHES: I’ll let Jon answer for 16

the CEA study, but for the CLASP and LBL study, the 17

television was on. 18

MR. FAIRHURST: Right, and in the case of 19

the CEA study, the television was specifically off 20

because we were doing a single point measurements 21

and there was no way to determine what the

– there 22

was no way t o insert in consumers’ homes, easily 23

anyway, a standard test pattern. So if we could 24

have done a, let’s say a 34 percent white screen, we 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 104 would have done that, but that was impractical. So 1

to keep the testing consistent, we simply said turn 2

the televisio n off. 3

MR. CALWELL: So it sounds like it’s 4

possible at least, then, that at the really low lux 5

conditions, you’d be missing the contribution of the 6

TV to the room’s own light level. 7

MR. FAIRHURST: That’s true. I did some 8

measurements at home and found that with the light 9

meter I had, which was roughly a $1000 Minolta light 10

meter, its sensitivity down below one lux was very 11

poor. So the

– so I often got zero lux measurements, 12

even though it was not truly zero, with that 13

particular instrument. It’s another point with the 14

CEA study, because it was kind of a group 15

contribution, rather than a single entity that we 16

hired that went out and bought many light meters. 17

We did use

– there were a variety of light meters 18

used in the study. We recommended that any done 19

with cell phones were eliminated because those are 20

not calibrated light meters. But the light meters 21

used for each data point, they are noted in the 22

study. 23

MR. CALWELL: Any other thoughts, Louis. 24

Does that cover it? 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 105 MR. DESROCHES: That cov ers it. 1

MR. CALWELL: Thank you. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks, Chris. 3

MR. DESROCHES: So some stakeholders have 4

recently suggested alternative room illuminance 5

points to test at , in public comments, and so some 6

examples include the zero, 12, 35, and 300 a s Jon 7

alluded to in his opening remarks. There’s also 8

been some suggestion of using

– to keep the existing 9

zero and 300 lux measurement, but add a third 10

measurement point, perhaps around ten. CLASP 11

recommends having three measurement points between 12

ten a nd 100. This is actually consistent with the 13

DOE proposed test points at 10, 50, 100 and 300. 14

And then if we go back to the cumulative 15

distributions that I showed previously, if one picks 16

just the 25 th , 50 th , and 75 th percentiles from those 17

distributi ons, you would pick illuminance values 18

that are roughly five, 15, and 45 lux, and you could 19

extend logarithmically to 135 to try to represent 20

maximum brightness. 21

And alternatively, if you pick the mid 22

points of the quartiles, you would pick the 12, 37, 23

62nd and 87th percentiles, you would choose one, 24

ten, 30 and 100 from those cumulative distributions. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 106 And again you could extend it to 300 to try and 1

represent saturation. And so these are multiple 2

ways of weighting the data. 3

And so, in an effort to d etermine how the 4

different choice of these different metrics, how did 5

that impact the overall reported energy value, DOE 6

conducted some additional testing, ABC testing, on 7

some televisions. These are seven televisions that 8

represent the 2011 model year, s o these are the most 9

recent televisions that DOE had, as well as EPA. 10

It’s a combined data set. They represent six major 11

manufacturers and those six major manufacturers 12

represent about 65 percent of the market. And this 13

includes LED LCDs as well as some plasmas. And so 14

this is indicative of the most recent ABC 15

implementations that DOE has access to. 16

And so DOE conducted some additional 17

testing at all these additional points for all these 18

televisions, and so what’s shown here are ABC tests 19

at zero lux, one lux, five lux, ten lux, 12 lux, 15 20

lux, 35 lux, 50 lux, 100 lux, 135, 150 and 300. So 21

this is a very big characterization

– very complete 22

characterization of the ABC response in these seven 23

televisions. 24

And again here I’m showing room 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 1 07 illuminanc e on the X axis, and power on the left

– 1

on the vertical axis, and power is again, a proxy 2

for luminance. There’s again, a step

- like behavior 3

for most of these televisions, and there are two 4

televisions that have a gradual response. And 5

again, the dashed line here, is just connecting the 6

dots, there’s no interpolation between the two. And 7

the televisions that have a gradual response do 8

behave in a fairly predictable and normal fashion in 9

between points that were previously untested. And 10

the other televi sions that have a very step

- like 11

behavior, do saturate and remain saturated at the 12

high levels. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: yes, Adam. 14

MR. GOLDBERG: This is Adam from 15

Mitsubishi. I wonder, do you have any explanation 16

for the discontinuous line shown by the purple one 17

at the top? 18

MR. DESROCHES: The top one? 19

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah. In other words, is 20

it order or time of day, different models, different 21

– what might have caused that because it seems

– it 22

could show what Bill was talking about, an 23

inexpensive senso r compared to meters, or something 24

else, I don’t know, but

– 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 108 MR. DESROCHES: This is

– this particular 1

television was a little bit sensitive and it did 2

jump between two levels at the high end, between two 3

power levels, and so this is characterizing the 4

e rror in that measurement for that one television. 5

None of the other six televisions had this kind of 6

behavior, this kind of response. Those other points 7

were fairly repeatable, but that top television did 8

have some issues with repeatability. 9

MR. GOLDBE RG: Did you try a different 10

unit of the same model, maybe? 11

MR. DESROCHES: No, there was just the one 12

unit. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Stephens. 14

MR. STEPHENS: I hate to point out the 15

obvious, but it was starting to look like that 16

before, but not only a re some of the sensors not 17

particularly sensitive, but above ten lux they 18

aren’t even functioning. I mean that’s what it 19

looks like over a lot of televisions, they just 20

don’t vary the power at all after ten lux. Am I 21

misreading something here? 22

MR. DESR OCHES: No, that’s correct, and as 23

I alluded to before, this is

– there’s one of two 24

general implementations of ABC, and this step like 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 109 behavior is one of them, so other fraction 1

televisions utilize this ABC response curve. And at 2

above ten lux, the ABC’s sensor is not doing 3

anything, and the television luminance is staying 4

constant. 5

MR. STEPHENS: So, you know, it seemed 6

like there were quite a number of other models 7

earlier that looked like they were doing that even 8

though fewer points had been tested, that’s still 9

what they looked like. 10

MR. DESROCHES: Yeah, and this is just 11

confirming that that is what exactly is happening. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic? 13

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, Louis, I’m sorry. We 14

are explaining, of course, that these are the latest 15

models

– 16

MR. DESROCHES: That’s correct. 17

MR. PETROLATI: These are all 2011. We 18

are indicating

– I believe you indicated that you’re 19

only seeing one that would respond through what we 20

would call a typical ideal curve for lux in this 21

particular case. We also have done

– there’s six 22

manufacturers represented here. We also have 23

confirmed with some additional testing that each 24

manufacturer actually implements the ABC performance 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 110 curve throughout its model lines in the same 1

fashion, and we have been told that before , so this 2

is very typical of the w ay televisions are 3

currently, in 2011, responding to the EPA test 4

procedure at zero and 300 lux. 5

MR. KUNDU : Bijit with Energy Solutions. 6

It also, on the other side of the spectrum, there 7

does, again, this is kind of stating the obvious, 8

but at the firs t, at one lux, it seems like for a 9

number of these sets, it jumps

– from zero to one 10

lux there’s a huge spike, maybe indicating that some 11

of these sets are, you know, have low power drive at 12

zero lux, which we’ve all discussed is kind of not a 13

practical or not a typical viewing condition. 14

MR. DESROCHES: Just to clarify, that’s 15

actually at the five lux measurement that it jumps 16

up for some of these televisions, so the zero and 17

one

– 18

MR. KUNDU : Oh, okay. 19

MR. DESROCHES: The zero and one are right 20

next to each other here, and then the five is this 21

one, and then the ten, 12, 15. 22

MR. KUNDU : But that yellow

– that yellow 23

curve, what would be the one lux on

– 24

MR. DESROCHES: Yeah, I think the zero and 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 111 one lux are ... 1

MR. KUNDU : Okay. Thanks for the 2

clarification. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 4

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, I think looking at 5

this comprehensively, if one were to do testing on 6

these televisions at the one or three, five lux, 7

something in that area, rather than zero, for a 8

number of the televisions, y ou would be in a very 9

high gain area. So I would assume that the 10

repeatability might be difficult across models. So 11

one way to solve the zero lux issue, where the 12

potential is that the manufacturer starves the 13

television at zero lux, so the good thing is it’s 14

easy to test at zero lux, the bad thing is it might 15

be starved. If you test just above zero lux, it 16

doesn’t necessarily solve things, because you’re on 17

this high gain curve and the repeatability between 18

units is probably going to be poor. So it’s 19

p ossible to measure at zero and then some reasonable 20

level, ten, 12, something like this, and then put a 21

floor under what can be repeated or reported at zero 22

lux. Such that if there is an abrupt change down to 23

zero you can only gain so much advantage out o f 24

doing so, and that would benefit manufacturers by 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 112 being able to do the simpler, more repeatable test 1

at zero and it would also avoid this issue of 2

starving the television at zero. 3

So moving on, as we tested around ten, or 4

we recommended 12, that’s ar ound the peak usage 5

pattern, so that’s a very reasonable level. Aside 6

from the television that turns back down, 300 is 7

very reasonable in that it gives you a worst case, 8

and in fact, if you look at the one television that 9

goes down at 100, the reduction i n power is very low 10

there, and the occurrences, as we’ve seen, are very 11

low there as far as viewing habits. 12

So I think it’s easy to, for the 13

manufacturers to say at 100, to kind of punt, and 14

say that test the worst case, nominally at 300, 15

though there may need to be some wording to deal 16

with non

- monotonic televisions, so that you would 17

truly test the saturation point. If you report that 18

and then just assume at 100 that there’s no real

– 19

ABC doesn’t really offer much power savings there, 20

so it’s kind of not worth worrying about. 21

There’s another good reason not to test 22

around 100, is that a very bright television may be 23

able to saturate higher. A very dim capability 24

television may ideally need to saturate before 100, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 113 but they might be tempted with a me asurement at 100 1

to deliver less power there. And that could become 2

prescriptive in that if you are cutting the power at 3

100 to help your test scores, but the television 4

isn’t really bright enough to do that well, 5

consumers might find that when they do vi ew their 6

television in that condition, ABC is a negative. 7

They would get a bad taste in their mouth about it, 8

and turn off the feature. And that would be a very 9

negative consequence for overall energy savings. 10

So because the potential savings at 100 11

ar e so low, if we can measure it at 100 and simply 12

assume that there are no significant power savings 13

around 100, I think we’re best served with that. 14

And having a

– potentially a

– the last measurement 15

as we recommended, in the 35 area so that we’re in 16

wha t we would hope to be part of the linear curve, 17

then that would also be effective. So that’s in 18

summary, why we recommended a true zero, possibly 19

with this floor, 12, around the peak, 35 which is 20

kind of midway geometrically between 12 and an 21

assumed satu ration of 100, and then one final test 22

at 300 or the saturation point. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic Petrolati. 24

MR. PETROLATI: Yeah, just one comment on 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 114 that, Jon , I’m trying to get the right numbers from 1

our presentation. But, it would certainly seem to 2

me wit h zero, 12, 35, and 300, that this same group 3

of manufacturers in trying to achieve the best 4

results of the test, would start their peaks 5

slightly beyond 35 lux in terms of their step 6

function. And at 35 lux, I guess we’re missing 7

somewhere between 25 and 35 percent of the 8

cumulative viewing hours. I wonder why we wouldn’t 9

test slightly above 35 to capture more of those 10

viewing hours. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 12

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, slightly above 35 may 13

also be acceptable. The key point is to avoid the 14

like ly point where different TVs should saturate 15

differently. I think no matter where you test, the 16

possibility is that there will be steps, some small 17

number of lux above that, and in fact when looking 18

at weighting factors, one might simply assume that 19

that is how a manufacturer might implement the 20

television. There’s another reason we might expect 21

to see that type of implementation, is that, as Bill 22

mentioned, consumer

– the manufacturers are 23

concerned about repeatability. So it’s very likely 24

that manufact urers will want flat areas around the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 115 measurement point so that it’s absolutely repeatable 1

across the sensors. That’s something that we’re not 2

seeing here today with 2011 TVs, but when you do 3

multiple measurement points and we need 4

repeatability, I expect to have a flat segments 5

around those measurements. 6

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. One other point 7

that’s not on this view graph, is that for all of 8

these televisions, we did multiple measurements at 9

ten, 50, 100, and 300. We found, for all practical 10

purposes, no variability between the measurement 11

points at ten, 50 and 100 in that testing. And 12

we’ll see if we can get that posted on our website 13

as well. However, the procedure for the direct 14

light source and how it is basically shined into the 15

sensor, is someth ing that we have been 16

investigating, and we found that that’s a critical 17

aspect in terms of getting that type of 18

repeatability. So we may be concentrating on 19

developing more in our Notice of Proposed Rule, the 20

actual procedure associated with shining that direct 21

light source into the sensor as a way to gain 22

repeatability. But our tests have shown 23

repeatability. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 116 MR. FAIRHURST: Can I clarify that was 1

repeatability within a single unit, or multiple 2

units? 3

MR. PETROLATI: That was r epeatability in 4

multiple tests on the same television, measured at 5

ten, 50 and 100, as well as zero and 300. 6

MR. FAIRHURST: And of course, as you 7

recognize, the manufacturers are making large runs 8

of televisions with parts that could come from 9

different runs of

– from our suppliers. So that’s a 10

real concern, it’s not within the single unit, it’s 11

across multiple units. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Bill? 13

MR. SCHLINDER: I think Jon beat me to the 14

punch in terms of

– 15

MR. PETROLATI: You guys do have quality 16

control standards and everything, right? 17

MR. SCHLINDER: Oh, absolutely. In fact, 18

we’re well known

– 19

PARTICIPANT: Jon and Bill or

– 20

MR. SCHLINDER: I believe our parent 21

companies are well known for those quality 22

assurance. I think his name was Demming, actually, 23

taught them a thing or two about it. 24

But all seriousness aside, the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 117 repeatability from unit to unit is critical, as well 1

as from lab to lab, and so I fully support, Vic, 2

your concentrating on how to supply the light source 3

in a very re peatable manner. 4

Backing up to the other subject of the 5

fact that many of these zero lux measurements appear 6

to be artificially low, Jon Fairhurst indicated that 7

perhaps giving a floor credit to that zero lux 8

measurement, compared to the next reading, which may 9

be at ten lux or 12 lux or whatever, is an idea. 10

Another idea would be to, in terms of the weighting 11

factors, it may be that the weighting factor all by 12

itself is going to give less impetus for a 13

manufacturer to artificially reduce that zero lux 14

point, simply because there’ll be less credit for it 15

due to the weighting. Currently, both California 16

and EPA are giving a 45 percent credit to that zero 17

lux point. You’ve already reduced it to 25 percent 18

with equal weighting, and with looking at the CL ASP 19

data, with the CEA data, it may reduce itself to, I 20

don’t know, something less than that. So I think 21

that’s all heading in the right direction. 22

MR. BROOKMAN: Chris. 23

MR. CALWELL: Yes, Chris Calwell from 24

Ec ova. Two questions that this makes me th ink of. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 118 One of them was, is there a luminance value at zero 1

lux below which the manufacturers think that TV 2

would be too dim? That’s the first question. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: (inaudible.) 4

MR. CALWELL: Yeah, when the room is in 5

zero lux, you know, or some thing very, very dark, is 6

there a measured lux, is there a measured

– excuse 7

me, nits value, measured luminance value of the TV 8

that you believe is too low? 9

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill? 10

MR. SCHLINDER: Having just performed 11

those presentations yesterday on tha t very thing, 12

where we dropped the room lighting to zero as far as 13

we could, we were demonstrating that some sets were 14

very, very readable, whereas others weren’t. It was 15

all because of the black level. The black level, 16

which means the contrast essential ly, of the TV. 17

And again, because of the huge disparity in not only 18

the black level of contrast, but also pattern 19

variation

– all these sets change their brightness 20

as a function of patterns as well, or at least a lot 21

of them do. We can’t even guarantee a given nit 22

level. The answer to your question is we don’t have 23

one. It depends upon the contrast level, which is 24

the black level, and it depends upon the pattern, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 119 and it would be inordinately difficult to establish 1

any kind of nit value like that. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 3

MR. GOLDBERG: Furthermore, it’s worth 4

understanding that for different technologies, they 5

have really different performance for black level, 6

emissive and transmissive devices that do this have 7

their different challenges at black levels , and 8

other technologies have other challenges. And 9

furthermore, that black level is a

– is a reasonably 10

big component of quality of the picture, and so 11

devices with really good black level performance 12

tend to be sort of very good picture display 13

devices, and so there’s a lot more to it than, well, 14

there’s a minimum. I think one of the effects of 15

what Bill said is, for a really good TV, a really 16

low brightness in low illuminance conditions is 17

fine, and for less good TVs, objectively less good 18

TVs, it woul d be a completely different number, 19

quite a bit higher. So maybe the answer is, well, 20

there’s no answer. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: Another way to look at 23

this is, kind of three points. There’s what’s the 24

darkest point, so the black backgroun d. What’s the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 120 brightest point, you know, the stars in a night 1

picture. And what’s the mid

- point, which is 2

typically going to be the skin tones. So, depending 3

on the gamma set ting as well, you might measure, hey 4

this TV’s really bright, so the stars are bright, 5

but the

– if the gamma setting is low, now the skin 6

tones are low and the television is going to be less 7

pleasing in those conditions, and then as Bill 8

mentioned, if the black levels are elevated, now the 9

skin tones are very near the black level, s o it’s 10

even worse. So bottom line is, it’s complex. 11

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, this is Adam again. 12

But one last thing, is

– as you can tell from this 13

couple of moments here, there’s a lot of variables 14

that go into the equation, and you shouldn’t always 15

assu me that because at a certain illuminance the 16

power consumption is a certain amount, that is 17

necessarily well, they turn that knob in order to 18

have better energy performance. There’s lots of 19

invariables and knobs and dials to twist that affect 20

how good the pictures are, and it’s a big balancing 21

act that’s done during the engineering of the 22

television to sort of try to maximize the quality, 23

minimize energy, maximize what the reviews will look 24

like, maximize how it’s going to look on a retail 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 121 shelf, et cetera , et cetera. It’s really complex. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Very good. Yes, Chris. 2

MR. CALWELL: Thank you, by the way. The 3

second question then was

– and we heard a couple 4

references to you don’t want the consumer to turn 5

automatic brightness control off, whi ch I think is 6

obviously true. We’ve seen examples in the review 7

literature where the reviewers themselves have said, 8

you should turn this off. You know your TV will 9

look better if you don’t have this feature engaged, 10

and so any suggestions, I guess from any 11

stakeholders, on what could the test procedure or 12

public policy do to discourage ABC from being turned 13

off? 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon ? 15

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, Jon Fairhurst. I’m 16

hoping that with good levels and a good test 17

procedure that this will motivate good designs of 18

ABC. So, for instance, testing has revealed that 12 19

lux is very common. That information is known to 20

manufacturers of US televisions. I would hope that 21

the manufacturers are going to design to get their 22

televisions to look really good there. So, assuming 23

that happens, then we will have improved ABC designs 24

and people will hopefully turn them on. But I also 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 122 agree that you are correct, reviewer s who are often 1

calibrating televisions and so forth. That class of 2

viewer is likely to turn ABC off. Installers, 3

custom installers are likely to turn ABC off. The 4

reason they’re going to do that is they’re going to 5

install it at a certain time of day. They’re going 6

to set it up, they’re going to calibrate it, and 7

they don’t want some

– the light level to change and 8

then the settings of the television are unknown and 9

they get a call from their customer, their client. 10

So there are certain groups of peop le who will turn 11

ABC off and yeah, that’s just the way it is. 12

But with improved designs, and I would say 13

that part of improving the design is not just being 14

not too dark, but also not having absolutely abrupt 15

steps, and I think that does help to

– so t hat the 16

consumer doesn’t really notice the ABC. With abrupt 17

steps where you go, hey, I turned the lights off and 18

the TV ramped down to an extremely dark level. 19

They’ll notice that. With the smoother designs, 20

they’re less likely to notice, more likely to leave 21

it on. 22

MR. CALWELL: And that was really part of 23

the question, was when Louis had shown the S curve, 24

I wondered, in general, if TVs had an ABC curve more 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 123 like that, would users be less likely to shut it 1

off, shut off that feature ? 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill? 3

MR. SCHLINDER: Yeah, I believe the curve 4

that was published by ISF there earlier, would 5

certainly make it very satisfactory. I think a lot 6

of the work that we’re doing today in this standard 7

is going to go in that direction. And finally, 8

relati ve to Jon ’s statement about professional 9

calibrators, should be noted that’s about probably 10

one percent. I don’t have the exact number

– it may 11

not even be that high, so most people turn their TVs 12

on and they’re lucky if they can find their HD 13

channels, a nd then they call it quits at that point. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 15

MR. PETROLATI: Doug, one other question. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Vic, please. 17

MR. PETROLATI: Vic Petrolati. We had 18

also noticed in our testing that when the TV is 19

switched into other m odes from home mode, that in 20

many cases ABC is disabled. Can I get a sense of 21

whether that’s appropriate in terms of the way a 22

television should respond in terms of providing the 23

consumer the maximum benefits associated with ABC? 24

And is that anything tha t we can do under those 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 124 circumstances? 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill? 2

MR. SCHLINDER: Yeah, Vic, in many cases 3

in your retail mode, which we’ve all just talked 4

about an hour earlier, is, at least in our case, our 5

brightest mode, you really don’t want to have that 6

variability of automatic brightness control because 7

depending upon the store lighting and how that 8

sensor is picking up, you can lose a lot of sales if 9

your TV suddenly turns dim because it was shadowed 10

somehow, you know, the lighting, so yeah, retail 11

mode, you don’t want that variability of ABC in 12

there, so I would imagine that a lot of them don’t 13

have the ABC set there. I don’t have any details on 14

that, but that would be a motivation in terms of 15

sales to have your retail mode not only the 16

brightest mode, but more than likely, not to have an 17

ABC, which is going to c ut down on that brightest 18

mode. 19

Because it’s incredible how many people 20

buy TVs based simply on the brightness as they’re 21

lined up on a store wall. I have experience of 22

that, recent experience, and in terms of this, if we 23

lose all our sales, the whole game’s over anyway. 24

So that’s the motivation. And I think if we’re 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 125 testing in the highest mode anyway in terms of that 1

65 percent luminance ratio, I think that part of it 2

is covered because what it’s saying is that the home 3

mode has to be at least 65 pe rcent of that very high 4

end retail mode, or brightest mode. So by not 5

having an ABC, it’s full maximum rated, and now we 6

have to be 65 percent of that, which pushes the home 7

mode up. 8

Some people would question that that 65 9

percent is actually eliminat ing some TVs from saving 10

even more power, because there are technologies out 11

there that are going to push up the retail 12

brightness and capture the sales for a good reason. 13

And they would maybe be able to bring their home 14

setting down to 50 percent, but be cause it’s told 15

that you have to be at least 65 percent, then the 16

home mode is at least 65 percent. In some cases 17

it’s too bright, causing less savings which is what 18

was motivating that whole home

- retail forced menu in 19

the first place. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Ch ris, you have another

– 21

Chris. 22

MR. CALWELL: Vic, I think you were 23

referring to modes beyond the retail one, right? 24

MR. PETROLATI: Correct. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 126 MR. CALWELL: So the other default display 1

conditions

– 2

MR. PETROLATI: Preset modes. 3

MR. CALWELL: I a gree we should say 4

“presets” instead of “modes”

-- it can be confusing. 5

So, sports, movie, things like that

– should or 6

could ABC operate during those conditions, which are 7

also commonly used in the ho me, but are not the 8

retail mode. Maybe that’s the mos t precise way to 9

ask the question. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 11

MR. FAIRHURST: So Vic you asked about the 12

different modes, if they turn off ABC. For Sharp, 13

my most recent data point is the retail mode, we 14

turn off ABC per policy, simply because of the 15

reason that Bill mentioned, that we want it to be 16

absolutely repeatable, location to location. 17

There’s also the concern that DOE pointed out, which 18

is that once you’ve gone into home mode, sometimes 19

you can’t actually get back to retail mode, which 20

complicates t esting. So if we were to eliminate all 21

ABC off modes, then we would definitely be 22

eliminating our retail mode after going into home 23

mode, which would be unfortunate for doing testing 24

after the fact. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 127 But, yeah, we turn it off for home mode. 1

I think some televisions I saw a few years ago did 2

turn off ABC on some modes, but I don’t know if 3

that’s commonly practiced with our televisions, but 4

I think most of them have

– most, if not all, have 5

ABC on once you’ve gone into the home mode. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. You want to

– 7

MR. DESROCHES: Yes, I’ll wrap up. So, 8

this table here shows if any of the suggested room 9

illuminance levels were used today on the 10

calculation of reported energy use for those seven 11

televisions that were recently tested, how would 12

that impact the reported energy value? So these are 13

all percent changes relative to the current Energy 14

Star reported values. So the Energy Star is 15

zero/300 with a 45/55 percent weighting. And so 16

then there’s the NOPR proposal here of 10, 50, 100, 17

300, and th en zero, 12, 35, 300; zero, 10, 300; 18

five, 15, 45, 135; and then the last one is one, 19

ten, 30, 100, and 300. And so given that DOE had 20

completed extensive testing on those 2011 model TVs, 21

we could calculate what that reported energy value 22

could be. 23

The column on the left there, the 46

- inch 24

LED, that is the TV that had the gradual response, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 128 and so you can see that relative to all the other 1

televisions, that TV is performing

– has a reported 2

energy value that is much more favorable than the 3

other televisio ns, regardless of what the specific 4

calculation was. In the NOPR case, its energy value 5

that is reported is actually the same as what is 6

currently done in Energy Star, but all the other 7

televisions had a reported energy value that was 8

significantly greate r. 9

For the other proposed room illuminance 10

levels, the reported energy level of that one 11

gradual television , that reported energy value goes 12

down by a fair amount. But again, compared to the 13

other televisions, that difference between that 14

television and the step function televisions is 15

about the same, regardless of which calculation you 16

use. 17

One quick note is this television here, 18

the 51

- inch plasma, is currently qualified by Energy 19

Star, but only barely so, and regardless of what 20

metric is chosen for the room illuminance 21

calculation, it then drops out of the Energy Star 22

qualification. And then the other is the 60

- inch 23

LED television here, currently qualifies for Energy 24

Star, and the only point where it then becomes 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 129 disqualified from Energy Star is th is 35 percent 1

here. So it remains Energy Star qualified for all 2

of these other calculations, but it’s no longer 3

Energy Star qualified for this 35. 4

And just to clarify, all of these other 5

calculations are done with equal weighting. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 7

MR. FAIRHURST: As one would expect, I 8

would think that the implementations would change 9

for future models with different weightings. So the 10

television on the right with

– that have the step 11

functions, I think, we would no longer see that 12

implementation and overall, I think that’s a good 13

thing. I think the other point, I’ll bring it up. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Matt. 15

MR. MALINOWSKI: Matt Malinowski, ICF. 16

Just a point of clarification. The past drafts of 17

the revised Energy Star, specific issue for 18

tele visions, the levels were adjusted to take into 19

account the proposed DOE lux levels. So it might be 20

premature to say whether a particular television 21

would qualify or not. 22

MR. DESROCHES: Yeah, let me qualify. 23

This is just

– if this calculation were done just 24

like that today, and just talking about the existing 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 130 calculation, this is not a comment about future 1

Energy Star qualification. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Jon , yes. 3

MR. FAIRHURST: I remember my other point. 4

If there were, in addition, a floor put un der the 5

relative drop in power between the ten or 12 point, 6

whatever the lowest non

- zero point is, and the 7

measurement at zero, those columns

– or excuse me, 8

the rows that include measurements at zero would 9

actually potentially go up for the TVs that have 10

step functions as well. So that would additionally 11

help to mitigate the

– any gains at under driving 12

the television at zero. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 14

MR. GOLDBERG: This is Adam from 15

Mitsubishi. The data behind this chart, is that 16

available? 17

MR. DESROC HES: So

– yes

– 18

MR. GOLDBERG: In fact, there it is. 19

MR. DESROCHES: Yeah, so again, we’ve 20

included it in the presentation for reference, and 21

this will be posted on the DOE website shortly. 22

This was done very recently. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Other questions and 24

comments on either the data or the chart itself? 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 131 Chris. 1

MR. CALWELL: Yes, Vic made a comment 2

earlier, and I just wanted to make sure that the 3

manufacturers thought that was true. I think we had 4

done a little bit of t esting to see if ABC tended to 5

perform in a similar fashion across multiple models 6

made by the same manufacturer. And in the case 7

where we did that, it looked like it was true. Is 8

that your understanding as well, for all of the TVs 9

that a given manufactu rer makes that has ABC, would 10

they tend to implement ABC in a similar fashion at a 11

given time? 12

MR. DESROCHES : For a given model year

. 13

MR. CALWELL: Yeah, that’s right, in one 14

year. 15

MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Jon

. 16

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, in looking at the 17

data charts that you just showed, it shows the 18

lowest lux level at one. I don’t see any data there 19

for zero, so if that was accidentally left off, then 20

we’d appreciate getting that. 21

MR. DESROCHES: We’ll add that. 22

MR. BROOKMAN: So, looking ahea d, there 23

are

– you can see the comment boxes listed there in 24

eight and nine. As I read through them, I think 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 132 we’ve at least taking a shot at answering both. 1

Louis, is there anything in these comment boxes that 2

you would call out for additional comment? 3

MR. DESROCHES: I think we’ve discussed 4

all of these comments during the course of the 5

presentation. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: That’s what I thought as 7

well. So looking ahead, the 3

- D slides, there are 8

quite a few of them. And it’s now 12:30. So I’m 9

going to su ggest we pause for lunch, and unless 10

anyone objects. But let’s pause for lunch. It 11

takes, just about takes an hour to get to lunch and 12

come back, so we’ll resume here at 1:30. 13

I want to thank all the folks here 14

present, we had really, really positive and solid 15

comment here this morning, and I hope that will 16

continue after lunch. Most of you are familiar with 17

the Forestall building. I think you go down to the 18

ground floor, you go about 100 yards in that 19

direction, and then you go up the escalator to the 20

big cafeteria, or there’s a Subway shop where the 21

coffee shop is also on the ground floor that you can 22

find. You must wear your badge. You might need an 23

ID to get back through security at the big cafeteria 24

on the other side of the street. Don’t lea ve the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 133 Forestall building. Please do not, you won’t make 1

it back in time for us to resume at 1:30. You can 2

leave your stuff here, this room will be locked up 3

and so any of the things

– you know where the 4

restrooms are. I think that’s it. So we’ll see y ou 5

back here to start up at 1:30. 6

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the meet ing in 7

the above captioned matter was adjourned for lunch 8

recess , to reconvene at 1:30 p .m.) 9

10Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 134 AFTERNOON SESSION 1

1:38 p.m. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: So let’s start back up. We 3

are about to launch into a section on 3D overview et 4

cetera, and we’re going to hear right now from Mia 5

Forbes Pirie. 6

**3D Overview and Testing** 7

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Hi. So just in case, 8

as an aside before we start, just in case I rush out 9

of the room, it’s not personal . I’m not feeling 10

very well so one of my colleagues will take over if 11

that happens. Okay. 12

So I’m going to start with preliminary 13

conclusions, and in its NOPR, DOE didn’t propose to 14

include a 3D test procedure. It did , however, 15

explore two alternativ es for including 3D in a 16

future test procedure. And so I’m going to talk you 17

through our thinking on that, starting with the 18

energy impacts of 3D TV, and then looking at the 3D 19

TV market, and possible routes for the test 20

procedure development. 21

In terms of the order of this, the 22

information that you receive in section A will be 23

very relevant in section C . So I know it’s hard to 24

stay awake after lunch, but please try and remember 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 135 that. Thank you. 1

So we started by looking at the power 2

impacts of 3D TVs, and in 3D modes, TVs generally 3

consume a power premium, when compared to their use 4

in 2D mode. And our data, which is a reasonably 5

small sample, but shows quite a wide variability in 6

these premiums. We have one TV that showed a 7

negative 21.5 percent , and that was a retrofit 8

device. So it wasn’t what’s kind of standardly 9

found on the market. But the rest of our figures 10

were between two percent and a positive 86 percent. 11

So there seems to be quite a lot of variability. 12

So these are the

– a little bit about the 13

units that we tested. We tested five different 14

types of 3D TVs with two types of Blu

- ray players, 15

which were capable of converting 2D to 3D content. 16

And we span a number of technologies including 17

plasma, backlit and edgelit, LED LCDs, and t he rear 18

projection DLP, which was the TV that I mentioned 19

which had this retrofit function. 20

So in terms of the test that we performed, 21

we used

– 22

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, this is Adam from 23

Mitsubishi. Can you explain what you mean again, by 24

retrofit? 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 136 M S. FORBES PIRIE : The TV was a 2D TV and 1

it had an attachment which allowed playing in 3D so 2

the attachment did some kind of conversi o n t o 3D. 3

That’s what I mean by retrofit, as opposed to the TV 4

being one TV that was 3D. Maybe Chris Calwell wants 5

to add something? 6

MR. BROOKMAN: Chris or Vic ? 7

MR. PETROLATI: Oh, I’m sorry. We’re 8

trying to get the actual name of it. There was a 9

converter box that has to be purchased to allow this 10

TV to actually perform or actually show 3D. 11

MR. STEPHENS: This is Charlie Stevens. 12

And it has a power

-- associated power consumption 13

associated with a converter box as well? 14

MR. CALWELL: Correct. 15

MR. STEPHENS: And that was measured in 16

addition to the television power? 17

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Yes. 18

MR. STEPHENS: An d the result was minus 21 19

percent? 20

MR. BROOKMAN: So this is additive

– these 21

figures, right? 22

MR. CALWELL: Right. 23

MR. PETROLATI: A couple of other things 24

we want to mention. We discussed them yesterday. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 137 We’re not certain whether or not there was actually 1

an increased brightness associated with this 2

television, but actually in 3D there were some 3

concerns about the picture quality, both in contrast 4

and in other areas. Chris, would you be able to 5

speak a little more on that? 6

MR. CALWELL: This jus t in. New data. 7

So, our team did measure the TV and in 2D mode

– 8

this is tricky, right, because we were using a 3D 9

video clip as opposed to a test pattern, but we 10

measured luminance at the same exact point in the 11

same frame on a 3D and a 2D test clip. A nd this 12

particular television, the one that Mia was 13

referring to was 175 nits in 2D, normally you’d 14

expect a higher brightness in 3D. On this 15

particular TV, it was 76 nits in 3D. And so the 16

reason you see lower power, even with that extra 17

box, is much low er luminance. 18

MR. GOLDBERG: Well, so for I think maybe 19

the external box is causing an issue and it’s 20

probably worth just simply discarding this from 21

consideration because it’s not real helpful. DLP 22

televisions in general have a white light. It 23

consumes exactly as muc h power as it consumes, and 24

it doesn’t matter what the content is. 2D, 3D, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 138 black, white, green, yellow, doesn’t matter, it’s 1

going to consume what it’s going to consume more or 2

less. Any confusions and strangeness about whatever 3

this external box is on a DLP TV can only be a 4

distraction. I think you’ll find that DLP sets will 5

consume about precisely the same amount of power in 6

2D mode and 3D mode. 7

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Thank you. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks. 9

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Thanks, that’s very 10

h elpful. I think we do consider it a bit of an 11

anomaly, but we wanted to present just all of the 12

data that we collected. So, we agree. 13

In case you’re not familiar with the 14

wonderful cinematographic “Cloudy with a chance of 15

meatballs,” we chose that beca use it has both a 2D 16

version and a 3D version that you can buy, so that’s 17

why we used a ten minute segment of that. And we 18

performed some power consumption tests using the 3D 19

version, using the 2D version, and then converting 20

the 2D to 3D version with eac h of the Blu

- ray 21

players that do the conversion, and also two of the 22

TVs that we tested had the internal ability to 23

convert 2D to 3D. So we also checked out the 24

results with that. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 139 And this is some of what we found. So 1

there’s a lot of information on th is slide, so I’m 2

going to direct you a little bit to probably three 3

key points. So if you look at the 3D version in 4

watts, unsurprisingly, the two Blu

- ray players 5

played pretty much

– the two Blu

- ray players used 6

pretty much the same amount of power in pl aying 7

that. If you look at the 2D to 3D conversion, the 8

measurements are again very similar between the

– 9

both between each other, the 2D to 3D conversion, 10

and when you compare them with the 3D versions. And 11

we have, the next slide has percentages on it, so 12

I’ll show you that in a minute. 13

If you see the two little stars in the 14

middle of the 2D to 3D column, that was an anomaly 15

that occurred, whereby the second Blu

- ray player was 16

a different brand from the TV, and the TV didn’t 17

automatically recognize the signal as being a 3D 18

signal. So we discounted that value. What would 19

have had to happen would have been to change the 2D 20

into 3D mode, and so that’s what that means. 21

And the other point I’d like to draw your 22

attention to is another anomaly. It’s this 93.4 23

watts in 2D, and the fact that the setting was in 24

standard. And so what happened here was that in 2D 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 140 the Blu

- ray player did something strange, and 1

converted the setting to “standard” instead of 2

“cinema” . So the 3D reading is accurate, but the 2D 3

read ing is in a different setting. 4

And here we see the percentage 5

differences, and we can see that the difference from 6

the conversions, so the 2D to 3D conversion, and the 7

3D is minimal. Likewise, we see the next column, 8

the percentage difference in retai l from 3D to 2D to 9

3D is almost zero, which tells us what we already 10

guessed, but that most 3D TVs are as bright as they 11

can be when they’re playing in 3D. Then we see the 12

differences, in the next column, the percentage 13

increase from 2D to 3D in home mode . And so that 14

45.2 percent is the result of the odd 2D reading, 15

not the 3D reading, so the real value is the 2.04 16

percent. And you can see the differences on the TVs 17

other than the DLP TV are between two percent and 86 18

percent. 19

And so based on that lim ited data set

-- 20

we’d obviously like to expand the data set and get 21

any other data that other parties have

– but based 22

on the data set so far, there’s very little 23

difference in how the TV displays 3D content, 24

whether it’s converted or in 3D original format

. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 141 The difference in energy consumption between 3D and 1

2D modes is, as we said in the beginning, can be 2

quite significant, and it’s highly variable. And 3

there was some difficulty with one of the products 4

which was the two stars that I explained on the 5

sli de before, where the TV didn’t recognize the 6

content as 3D. 7

So next we’re going to move on to the 3D 8

TV market and see how many 3D TVs are really out 9

there and how important this area is . Currently 10

about 20 percent of TV sales are 3D capable. And 11

this is increasing, particularly for larger sizes, 12

so sizes above 40 inches, have about a 45 percent 13

market share. The sales of larger TVs are also 14

occupying a larger share of the market, whic h 15

suggests that more

– there’s going to be even more 16

3D TVs on the market. And there are barriers to 17

adoption of 3D, but they are decreasing, so I’m 18

going to talk you through that. 19

This basically shows the increase in 3D 20

shipments, and the second grap h, the bottom line is 21

the 3D that’s growing, the green line, and the top 22

line is the 2d that’s decreasing proportionately. 23

And it looks like at some point they will cross 24

over. And that was

– the previous slide was global 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 142 shipments forecast. 1

This slide is also displays such data, and 2

it looks at the same forecast in shares by regions. 3

And we can see that the US, globally, has the 4

largest 3D

– the largest share of 3D TVs. And this 5

dotted line here is the average worldwide, so we can 6

see that the US is way above the world average. 7

And here, in the next slide, we’ve just 8

compared the DisplaySearch market forecast to the 9

CEA market forecast, and the CEA market forecast was 10

more recent, so both show that 3D is rapidly 11

growing, but just at a slightly diffe rent pace. 12

This is a slide from Sony, which 13

essentially , the big graph at the top , shows the 14

same thing : the increase in 3D in the market. But 15

the table at the bottom is what’s interesting and 16

that’s where we get our 45 percent projection for 17

2012 in th e 40

- plus range. 18

And this just shows how overall the 19

shipment s of smaller TVs are decreasing, and 20

shipments of larger TVs are commensurately 21

increasing, so more people are buying bigger TVs. 22

And here we see

– I’ve taken out

– it’s 23

the same data, but I’ve taken out the smaller TVs 24

which kind of cluttered the graph, and we see the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 143 yellow line is the 40 to 44

- inch, which towards 2015 1

overtakes the 30 to 34

- inch TVs that are being sold, 2

which are currently

-- have the biggest market 3

share. 4

Moving on to barriers to the adoption of 5

3D technology. Initially, one of the barriers was 6

considered to be cost. Cost has declined over time 7

and now cost is much less of a barrier than it was 8

before, so 3D TVs cost closer to what their 2D 9

counterparts do. And anoth er key barrier was 10

considered to be content, and many

– SONY and ESPN 11

surveys found that consumers didn’t really want TV 12

because of insufficient content to play on the TV. 13

And it seems that both providers and manufacturers 14

are committed to 3D, and seem to be a lot more 3D 15

content which is developing, and issues to do with 16

delivering 3D content are being overcome. Right now 17

there are nine US channels which show 3D content, 18

five of those show 3D content 24/7. And a magazine 19

says that US consumers with 3D T V sets “have 20

something new to watch virtually every day of the 21

week” . In addition to that, over 90

- plus titles are 22

available on Amazon’s website. So the 3D content 23

barrier is being overcome. 24

Currently one of the issues that DOE would 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 144 have in looking at 3D is DOE is not aware of any 1

usage data on 3D, and as you’ve seen earlier today, 2

DOE is considering both a single metric and 3

different metrics for its test procedure. So if it 4

were to go down the single metric route, it would be 5

very difficult to incorp orate 3D into a duty cycle 6

since we don’t have any data on 3D usage. So if 7

anyone has data, we would be very grateful if you 8

could point us in that direction. 9

So, as I mentioned, DOE considered two 10

possible routes for test procedure development, and 11

thi s section just talks you through those routes. 12

The first is based, as I said, on the data that we 13

looked at in part A, which is the idea of

– sorry, 14

that’s the second, let me start with the second

– of 15

using a 2D to 3D Blu

- ray player to convert the IEC 16

te st clip. And that’s why we did the investigation 17

with the 2D to 3D converters. And the other option 18

is creating a 3D version of the current 2D IEC test 19

clip. 20

So the creation of a new 3D version of the 21

2D test clip is something that DOE looked at as one 22

of these possible options. IEC gave DOE all the 23

rights that they had to convert the test clip, so 24

the only rights that they weren’t able to pass on 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 145 were the CEA’s rights, which they don’t have the 1

right to pass on to third parties, and obviously DOE 2

woul d be considered a third party in this context. 3

So although the IEC can use all of the 4

test clip and could make a 3D test clip, right now 5

DOE couldn’t use the whole of the test clip. So if 6

in the future DOE were to go down this option, it 7

would have two choices. It would be able to wait 8

and see if IEC develops a 3D test clip and then use 9

that test clip, or it would be able to develop a 10

test clip itself, but then it would need to cut out 11

the portions that it didn’t have the rights to, and 12

it could then a dd other material to make sure that 13

the APL remained the same. 14

The second option is converting using 2D 15

to 3D converter, the Blu

- ray players that we talked 16

about in Part A, and although our initial testing 17

was very limited, it did seem to yield positive 18

results. It was also with 2010 TVs and Blu

- ray 19

players, so it was right at the beginning, and we 20

would like to see what test results would yield with 21

more recent, sort of more developed, 3D TVs and 22

converters. And as we mentioned before, there was 23

that m ismatch where a TV didn’t recognize the 3D 24

content from one of the converter players, so it 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 146 would be interesting to investigate whether that was 1

because it was an early generation model, or whether 2

that was an issue that could occur in different 3

circumstan ces. And DOE hasn’t yet done any testing 4

of this kind with the IEC 62 0 87 test clip, so that 5

would be something that we’d need to be 6

investigating if DOE were in the future, to want to 7

go down this route. 8

Briefly, on the international scene, as I 9

mention ed, IEC has the full rights to develop the 3D 10

test clip based on its current 2D test clip. And 11

there is a CEA 3D discovery group investigating 3D 12

technologies and issues with measurement of 3D 13

energy consumption. Across the seas, in Europe and 14

Australia, both Europe and Australia are interested 15

in 3D test clips. They would prefer that they be 16

developed through IEC or alternatively

– they said 17

that they would be open to them coming through 18

Energy Star, which this kind of test procedure, if 19

it were develop ed, the 3D by DOE, would end up being 20

an Energy Star test procedure. But the preference 21

is for it to be developed through IEC. 22

And, looping back to the beginning here, 23

just to remind you that DOE didn’t propose including 24

a test procedure in its

– in thi s NOPR, but is open 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 147 to the alternatives that we’ve just discussed for 1

including 3D in its test procedures in the future. 2

And we would very much like to hear comments from 3

all of you on both routes that we’ve investigated 4

and whether it is important for DOE to have a 3D 5

test procedu re. In addition, if anyone has data on 6

usage, we’d also be grateful if you would share that 7

with us, or point us in the right direction. Thank 8

you. 9

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please, Bijit

. 10

MR. KUNDU : Bijit with Energy Solutions. 11

Just to clarify, when y ou say a test procedure in 12

the future, that doesn’t mean the final rule for 13

this test procedure, or this particular rulemaking, 14

it would mean an additional rulemaking onto this, or 15

– or

– 16

MS. FORBES PIRIE : I’m going to hand that 17

question to Vic. 18

MR. P ETROLATI: We, of course, haven’t 19

gotten stakeholder comments yet on this particular

– 20

these particular approaches that we’ve identified. 21

If, in fact, there is overwhelming desire from our 22

stakeholders to incorporate 3D into this test 23

procedure, we would be forced to so what’s called an 24

s

- NOPR or supplemental Notice of Proposed Rule, to 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 148 move forward. So I can’t say at this point that it 1

will not be included in this final rule. We are 2

certainly going to wait until we get stakeholder 3

comments before making that decision to see if it’s 4

worth potentially including it through an s

- NOPR. 5

MR. KUNDU : Well, I guess I’d like to be 6

the first commenter to say that based on the energy 7

use characteristics that you’ve shown, and the 8

increase in market share of these products, I think 9

we would support inclusion of a test procedure to 10

measure 3D televisions. 11

MR. PETROLATI: And Mia did mention that 12

the biggest constraint at this point is we have 13

absolutely no usage data. Consequently, if FTC or 14

EPA were to ask us wha t the contribution of 3D 15

televisions are in terms of total energy consumption 16

into that calculation, we would probably not have an 17

answer that we could give them at this point. But 18

if we had to estimate it, it would be extremely 19

small, even though the tel evisions themselves 20

potentially might consume significantly more energy 21

in 3D mode, the amount of operating hours is so 22

minimal at this point, that the total contribution 23

might be, in fact, minimal. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 149 MR. GOLDBERG: Vic sort of said what I was 1

going to say that even if there is a significant 2

power consumption difference in operating in 2D mode 3

and 3D mode, I expect that there’s rather low

– the 4

times

– the amount of cumulative time in 3D mode is 5

going to be quite low, even when someon e has both 3D 6

content available to them and the 3d television. 7

And it’s likely not worth the hassle by a fair bit 8

to do this, especially now when in historical terms, 9

3D is quite new, really. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill. 11

MR. SCHLINDER: It’s absolutely true t hat 12

the number of TVs, usually high end TVs, you know, 13

we’re not talking the entry point TVs that have 3D 14

capability, but the cost of doing 3D has come down 15

as Mia already indicated. We are essentially, in 16

most cases, on the high end TVs, bundling 3D with 17

smart internet TV connectivity, because buyers that 18

are going to buy the premium TVs want to future 19

guarantee their purchase, that if 3D in the future 20

becomes important, they have a TV that can do it. 21

But a lot of the surveys

– I don’t have them in my 22

he ad as to which ones

– would indicate people are 23

buying it with little intention of using it, because 24

the cost differential is so minimal, you buy 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 150 something just because you don’t want to not have it 1

some day if you ever want it. It doesn’t mean 2

people are using it, as Vic indicated. So the 3

actual usage of the 3D is quite minimal at this 4

point, just indicated by the content. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill, is that conjecture, 6

or do you have actual data? 7

MR. SCHLINDER: I participated in a CEA 3D 8

discovery group a s did Vic, and I believe that 9

information was

– I’d have to go look at that, I 10

didn’t just make that up. I’ve seen it somewhere, I 11

don’t know where, and it might have been through 12

that 3D discovery group that there was some 13

indication that buyers were not necessarily going to 14

use it. It was just bundled in. I do know that 15

with our advanced sets, we’re bundling all these. 16

You cannot buy an advanced, high end set, without 17

the 3D, so if you want all the performance features 18

and internet features, then you’ re going to get the 19

3D with it. It’s like buying a car where you’re 20

going to get

– I don’t know

– the features are 21

bundled , the options are bundled in a luxury car, 22

obviously. You don’t need them all, but they’re 23

there. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 151 MS. FORBES PIRIE : L ike a car without the 1

windows. Y ou can’t buy a car without the windows. 2

MR. SCHLINDER: I’m sure there are 3

exceptions to that rule, but that’s the general 4

trend. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon , did you want to 6

comment here? Yes. 7

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, I have a few 8

comments. First of all I agree that the thing 9

that’s missing is the usage data. Until we know 10

what the

– that the usage is significant enough to 11

be concerned with, then it’s hard to know that we 12

need to test the sets for 3D. But all the other 13

conditions, I would agree, are there in that 14

television s are shipping with 3D more and more, 15

there is some content available, so the usage data 16

is kind of the last piece in the puzzle for the 17

justification side. 18

Regarding the practicality of m easuring. 19

I think one thing that wasn’t necessarily mentioned 20

or clarified is that a lot of people think that the 21

additional power from

– consumed by televisions in 22

the 3D mode might be because of the signal 23

processing, doing some magic things with the im age 24

and so forth. And that’s not really the case. From 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 152 what I’ve seen, when you put on the glasses, for 1

instance, you’ll get some light loss, and so when a 2

TV goes into the 3D mode, it will boost the 3

brightness to compensate. So it’s really not a 4

conten t issue as much as it’s a mode selection 5

issue. 6

Sharp’s 3D televisions, the ones that I’m 7

aware of anyway, all have 3D buttons, and actually 8

allow you to select 3D, the different modes, top, 9

bottom, left, right, and whether or not you want to 10

boost the levels. So as far as modes would go, one 11

would need to, you know, ideally you would give it 12

3D material, it would go into a mode automatically, 13

but it’s possible you could be asked, which mode 14

would you like, and then

– so there are additional 15

complicati ons to designing a test procedure that 16

deals with this. But it really is a mode issue 17

rather than a content issue. And given that, it is 18

appropriate to use converters, like a Blu

- ray 19

upscaling or 3D converter, in that if it does things 20

properly, then it would be a good indication of the 21

3D power consumption in that the television would 22

switch into a mode. 23

And then as far as the practicality of

– 24

or the logistics to get a test procedure, I actually 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 153 was the person who edited the

– both the SD and HD 1

mater ial for IEC. I authored the DVDs myself, and 2

managed the authoring by Sony

– Sony volunteered to 3

do the authoring on the Blu

- ray disc, simply because 4

my $500 tool didn’t have one feature that their 5

$20,000 tool had, and I didn’t have $20,000 spare 6

bucks t o buy the authoring tool. But that’s really 7

– the issue is

– it’s one of authoring and making 8

sure that that’s done correctly, and it really does 9

need to be done carefully. 10

To give you an idea, when I implemented 11

the

– well, both of the discs use MPEG I I, and 12

different MPEG II encoders actually change the APL 13

of color bars. They weren’t consistent. So I had 14

to go through and find an MPEG II encoder that would 15

minimize the APL shifts, because you’d think it 16

would be one to one, but it’s not. So

– yes, MPEG 17

II compression. 18

MR. GOLDBERG: That’s why they call it 19

compression, I said. 20

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, so it is loss

- y and 21

so it can even lose its DC level, and the average 22

picture level. I do personally have copies of the 23

master files for doing the 3D conversion, so if at 24

some point third party is given the rights to make 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 154 the final, please contact me, because it should be 1

done from the original master, uncompressed master, 2

rather than from the already MPEG II compressed 3

content. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: That m aster file you’re 5

referring to

– I lost track of which one that is. 6

MR. FAIRHURST: That’s the IEC

– 7

MR. BROOKMAN: The IEC. 8

MR. FAIRHURST:

-- broadcast content loop. 9

MS. FORBES PIRIE : And Jon , could you 10

speak a little bit to where the IEC is in its 11

process with considering a 3D test clip? 12

MR. FAIRHURST: We’ve had some meetings 13

recently where in the middle of updating IEC 6 2 087, 14

to version four. The main things we’re doing is 15

making it a multipart standard, we’re adding 16

computer monitors. As a multipart standard, we 17

would be able to update individual product areas in 18

parallel in the future. Right now it’s one big 19

document, so every time you open up the package, you 20

have to wait for it to get put back together before 21

we can get a new scope and move on. 22

In addition, we’re looking at updating the 23

TV area, certainly for ABC, potentially adding 24

luminance, and we’ve spoken about adding 3D as well, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 155 but we haven’t made a final decision on that at this 1

point. I think the key point, though, is that i n 2

the interim, with a properly implemented converter 3

box, that would be a proper way to test for now, 4

before there is a clip ready. But because there 5

could be some variance between the different boxes, 6

in the long run, the right way to do it is to have 7

th at one test disc that everyone uses and gets the 8

same results with. 9

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 10

MR. FAIRHURST: You’re welcome. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 12

MR. STEPHENS: I just want to weigh in and 13

support Bijit ’s notion that I think we should at 14

least consider how to test it, even if we don’t end 15

up doing anything with it right away. I think it’s 16

worth, at least especially if IEC is also sort of 17

going on a parallel track. Whether it’s worth doing 18

an s

- NOPR or not, based on timing, I don’t kno w 19

right now, but I think

– my concern is that based on 20

what little I have seen is that the televisions 21

we’re placing into the field today are, potentially 22

on an ever

- increasing basis, using perhaps a third 23

more energy than we think they are. Didn’t I see on 24

average, maybe 35 percent increase when used in 3D 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 156 mode? Am I mistaken? 1

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Yeah. 2

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, but you can’t assume 3

that at any point in the foreseeable future that 100 4

percent of television watching will be in 3D. 5

MR. FAIR HURST: Well, we don’t assume 100 6

percent of anything ever. 7

MR. GOLDBERG: Well, you’re only going 8

with the 35 percent if you’re assuming 100 percent 9

in 3D content. If you only assume say five percent 10

or ten percent in 3D content, then you’re talking 11

ab out two or three percent increase. 12

MR. STEPHENS : And if that’s two or three 13

percent per year, that gets to be a pretty big 14

number in ten years. We’re planning 30 years out 15

for power consumption, so we’re looking at trends. 16

So it’s being taken up. I m ean I know in my own 17

neighborhood, it’s being taken up at an alarming 18

rate. I didn’t even know it existed until about 19

three months ago and already I’ve got neighbors who 20

are watching half of what they watch in 3D when it’s 21

available. So it’s a

– I know i t’s happening, we 22

know it’s happening. We’re out in the market all 23

the time, surveying. I didn’t know what the 24

increase was. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 157 We may have some data for you. That sets 1

my other point is we may inadvertently, given the 2

jump in consumption when it’s ope rating

– when the 3

same TV is operating in 3D, we may wonder why our 4

data that we find is suddenly one TV is using 30 5

percent more power, you know, on Friday than it was 6

on Tuesday. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: Tagged as such, but you 8

notice the jump. 9

MR. STEPHENS : Yeah, we’ll notice the jump 10

and we’ll tag it, obviously, as something to look 11

into and find out if it’s 3D capable. I just added 12

another question to my survey. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam, go ahead. 14

MR. GOLDBERG: So these were 2009 models 15

or 2010? 16

MS. FORBES PIRIE : Chris and Chris

-- they 17

were 2010, weren’t they? 18

MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. I think we’ll find 19

that even if that 30 percent number is right for 20

those devices, it’s not going to be nearly correct 21

for next year’s device. And 3D’s still real earl y. 22

MR. BROOKMAN: On the development side. 23

MR. GOLDBERG: Well, look, so it’s just 24

broadly speaking in terms of television 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 158 technologies, things get introduced first at the 1

most expensive, high end devices, and they’re 2

expensive in several different asp ects, expensive. 3

And then as volumes increase, the costs in many 4

dimensions goes down and it migrates down the 5

market, that is to less and less expensive devices. 6

So I think that 2009, 2010, certainly was still 7

quite early in 3D, and those devices are qu ite 8

likely to be quite different from what the majority 9

of 3D devices would be in say this year or next 10

year. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. Vic. 12

MR. PETROLATI: Yeah, I just wanted to 13

indicate that even if we do not go forward with an 14

s

- NOPR, this is an issue we plan on following very 15

closely. We plan on doing, most likely, some 16

significant testing that will probably not be 17

completed prior to this rule being finalized. We’re 18

expecting at this point to test, probably in the 19

neighborhood of 16 addit ional televisions, all the 20

latest model years, to determine what, in fact, the 21

energy consumption is for the newest model years. 22

That will certainly be a lot more than what we 23

currently have, and we currently haven’t tested any 24

of the TVs with the passive glass technology, so 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 159 we’re going to insure ourselves that we cover all of 1

the technologies that are currently available. And 2

that, of course, will be data that we will provide 3

on our website, independent of whether or not we 4

include into this rule, a 3D test, and we will 5

continue to monitor to see if we can find data 6

sources. And Charlie, if you’ve got the ability to 7

provide us that information, that would be extremely 8

helpful, because we’re trying to keep up with all of 9

these aspects, because we are cer tainly concerned 10

with the number of shipments and the increase in 11

terms of software available to the consumer that 3D 12

in the future will be, in fact, something that will 13

be much more mainstream than it is today. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill. 15

MR. SCHLINDER: Tha t sounds like a good 16

idea. Are you going to be testing it with the IEC 17

loop with a 3D conversion, a 2D to 3D Blu

- ray as 18

opposed to “Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs”? 19

MR. PETROLATI: Well, Bill, as you know, 20

that was one of the recommendations that has n’t been 21

finalized yet, as part of the 3D discovery group. 22

We would love to see that report finalized and we’re 23

to wait, I think, until that report is finalized 24

before we start conducting any testing. But as it 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 160 currently stands, as a draft report, I beli eve that 1

was the recommendation from the manufacturers, and 2

that would be our intention. 3

MR. SCHLINDER: Great. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Charlie. 5

MR. STEPHENS: Another question for Vic. 6

We also still have a significant resource going into 7

television w ork in the field in the northwest, all 8

four states, and we have partners north and south of 9

us that are also engaged . So we have the ability to 10

go to our distributor partners, which is where we do 11

our work in that market, to find out, to track 3D 12

sales, i f that would also be of interest. 13

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. I think we’ve got 14

some sources for 3D sales. Any additional data that 15

we can get is always worthwhile. 16

MR. STEPHENS: Okay. Because we’re out 17

there, they’re providing us information anyway, we 18

can ask that question too. 19

MR. PETROLATI: Good. Good. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. So very

– yes, 21

Jon

. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, Jon Fairhurst. One 23

thing I would note regarding the testing is that it 24

will significantly increase the cost of doing the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 161 test because we’re doing four luminance measurements 1

and we say, oh, now we have to do it in the 2

additional 3D mode. Potentially, assuming we test 3

this with the ABC modes, now we’re doing four 4

additional power measurements for 3D, so I would 5

hope that we woul d balance the additional cost of 6

testing with the actual usage data. And of course, 7

if it is significant, then it needs to be tested. 8

Thank you. 9

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. So very 10

constructive, lots of good content there. 11

MR. CALWELL: One other question. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Chris. 13

MR. CALWELL: I took notes when we were

– 14

when the comments were made about new 3D 15

implementations in 2012, but just wondered if anyone 16

could offer any more detail there. Is there a new 17

technological approach that might make that power 18

delta either higher or lower than what we’ve seen? 19

Obviously the big change is moving I think to 20

passive glasses instead of active, but any other 21

guidance you could give us on what to look for, 22

trends coming, things to measure, anyth ing? 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon , please. 24

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, Jon Fairhurst. The 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 162 three basic technologies are the active glasses, 1

passive glasses and then no glasses. And then as 2

far as which technologies are chosen, some 3

manufacturers might have technology in one area and 4

another, so they might lean one way and another. 5

And then other manufacturers that don’t have a “dog 6

in the hunt” , as they say, they’re going to be 7

looking at what the consumers want the most and 8

trying to provide those televisions as bes t they 9

can. So I think it hasn’t all

– we haven’t seen 10

exactly how this is going to trend. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 12

MR. GOLDBERG: So I’m interested to see 13

what kind of numbers end up coming up with, but I 14

wouldn’t expect that the biggest factor by a long 15

s hot would have anything to do with the glasses 16

technology. Primarily

– I mean the power 17

difference, the consumption difference of what 18

you’re essentially doing is blocking half the screen 19

for one eye, and then blocking the other half of the 20

screen for the other eye, and so it decreases the 21

amount of light you’re seeing, because each eye only 22

gets half as much light for each time. And so it 23

takes more power to turn up the brightness to make 24

up that difference and make it look as bright, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 163 because you’re spli tting it into two eyes. 1

The glasses, eh. I mean, the power it 2

takes to signal to the glasses, I would expect to be 3

minor in comparison. 4

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, and I should just 5

say, I don’t think we were concerned about the power 6

consumption of the glasses, or the communication 7

with them, but it was

– I think the published 8

literature says that the active glasses have a 9

higher opacity than the passive ones, and so it 10

would take more of a luminance boost to overcome 11

that in an active 3D versus passive. That was the 12

understanding from the literature. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Yes, are we

– yes. 14

MR. PETROLATI: (off mic) 15

MR. BROOKMAN: You want to do it? 16

MR. PETROLATI: No, we’re going to

– 17

Simone, I think. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Simone, you’re going to

– 19

MS. SYDNOR : Yeah, he’s on here. It’s 20

Christopher W o ld. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 22

MS. SYDNOR : It wasn’t a question. He 23

just wanted to offer some answer

– I think there was 24

a question about ABC, saying that that he could 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 164 answer questions. 1

MR. BROOKMA N: About ABC? 2

MS. FORBES PIRIE : I would imagine he’s 3

talking about the CLASP study that was done to do 4

with

– wasn’t it? Or

– 5

MR. PETROLATI: Yeah, since we’re not on 6

that at this point, let’s

– we’ll ask him to submit 7

his comment in writing. 8

MS. SYDNOR : Okay. 9

MR. PETROLATI: Thank you. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: So I hope that you heard 11

that on line. This gentleman’s name is? 12

MS. SYDNOR : Christopher W o ld. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Christopher, so 14

please send your comments in to the Department. 15

So I think we’re finished with that last 16

segment. Let’s proceed with the next one, which is 17

on , standby , and off modes. And back to Christopher 18

Yoder. 19

MR. YODER: You’ve got a question there. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please use the 21

microphone. 22

MR. SHARP: Mark Sharp from Panasonic. 23

Just a general request

-- that query from the 24

webinar brought it to mind

– is there any way we can 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 165 get a list or the identities of those who are 1

participating by webinar, so those of us in the room 2

have an idea of wh o’s hearing all this? Because 3

right now we have no way of knowing. 4

MR. PETROLATI: The answer is yes. 5

MR. SHARP: Thank you. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: They will sign in, is that 7

correct, Simone? 8

MS. SYDNOR: (off mic) They can always 9

find it by going to the webinar attendee list ... 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Did you hear that? 11

She said that they’ve signed on for the webinar. 12

She can provide the list to Vic or another DOE 13

person, and that information can be sent forth. 14

On, Standby, and Off Modes 15

MR. YODER: All right. I believe we’re in 16

the home stretch here. So we’re going to go back to 17

the different modes in which DOE is proposing to 18

test. DOE investigated whether or not to conduct 19

testing with additional functions and power saving 20

technologi es enabled. Currently, in the NOPR, DOE 21

has proposed to not test with those additional 22

features enabled. But DOE is currently aware of 23

power saving technologies, including present 24

sensors, automatic shutoffs, and display power 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 166 management systems as well as others. 1

But DOE does request comment if 2

manufacturers or others, interested parties, know of 3

power saving technologies and how they’re 4

implemented and how they can affect energy 5

consumption. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: And I guess we’re talking 7

here about util ization of these, the adoption cycle, 8

stuff like that. Jon

. 9

MR. FAIRHURST: Jon Fairhurst. One thing 10

that I would warn against is to watch for any patent 11

issues with some new power savings technologies, 12

such as proprietary requirements that we must use 13

patented technology. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Charlie. 15

MR. STEPHENS: Question. Charlie 16

Stephens. Are these all

– what you’re referring to 17

here

– technologies that are saving on mode power? 18

MR. YODER: Not necessarily. 19

MR. STEPHENS: Because you go into, on the 20

next page, you start into the standby and off mode 21

measurement protocol, so I’m wondering if we’re not 22

talking about standby and off mode here, we’re 23

talking about on mode? 24

MR. BROOKMAN: I see that Anthony’s joined 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 167 us. Go ahead. 1

MR. ROT OLO: Yes, I think this is more 2

just a broad kind of request for information on any 3

possible power saving features. It doesn’t 4

necessarily have to be associated with standby or 5

off mode. It could just possibly place the TV into 6

one of these modes rather than specifically 7

associated with these features. 8

MR. STEPHENS: In other words, something I 9

sort of read this as sort of a feature that might 10

take a television out of on mode and place it in a 11

standby mode or something like that, so it would 12

impact the on mode power consumption, not be 13

associated with measuring the consumption of it once 14

it’s in that new state that it’s been placed in, 15

correct? 16

MR. YODER: Yes. 17

MR. STEPHENS: Okay. So it would 18

essentially affect an estimate of the on mode energy 19

c onsumption of the television on an annual basis, 20

for instance. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: I see Bill wants to 22

comment. 23

MR. SCHLINDER: You go first. 24

MR. CALWELL: Yes, and I think we’re just 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 168 at this time we’re not aware of any other features 1

or any other usage c haracteristics, but we’ll 2

welcome any stakeholder comments on that ground. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Mia, do you want to 4

comment? 5

MS. FORBES PIRIE : I just wanted to add 6

that we would

– 7

MR. BROOKMAN: Closer, Mia. 8

MS. FORBES PIRIE : We’re thinking things 9

lik e the power sensors that could switch off if they 10

don’t

– like light sensors, presence sensors, that 11

if you leave the room they can switch down and leave 12

sound only, and then come back on when you come back 13

in, or in Europe, they have a requirement that af ter 14

four hours, when no one’s pressed any button, the TV 15

powers down. So it’s those kind of things. And 16

we’re aware that sort of the presence sensors for 17

example are kind of new on the market, so just 18

anything like that which anyone thinks should be 19

take n into consideration, with ideas about how it 20

should be taken into consideration, because it’s 21

quite difficult to take those things into 22

consideration. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Adam. 24

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, I just wanted to note 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 169 that sometimes those things are difficult or 1

impossible to turn off. Things like

– I’m aware of 2

a television that if you haven’t done anything to it 3

in four hours it’ll turn itself off, and there’s no 4

way to turn that feature off. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Now, Bill. 6

MR. SCHLINDER: Th is is in reference to 7

Charles’ question about whether it would affect the 8

standby as well. I mean, obviously Anthony said the 9

primary function is taking it out of the on mode, 10

and of course you’re saving on mode power. With the 11

displays, the Energy Star displays, track that 12

they’re working on now, they were thinking or at 13

least proposing some very slight additional adders 14

to those displays in standby mode that had those 15

functions, simply because those functions might 16

require a tiny amount of power, a coup le tenths of a 17

watt, in standby, in order to sense the individual 18

to wake the TV back up. 19

So if you’re going to put extra 20

intelligence into standby, it will sometimes require 21

an adder, and they are considering that for computer 22

monitors and displays. So , yes, it could affect 23

slightly, the standby power, but its primary effect 24

is to turn it off. On mode. But once it’s been 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 170 turned into standby, some of these things would be 1

envisioned that would turn it back on when the 2

person walks into the room. And i n order for it to 3

be sensing whether the person walked into the room, 4

it requires slight additional power for that optical 5

sensor to be active. That’s just one example. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Yes, Jon

. 7

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, also in this area it 8

mentions additional functions. And that’s something 9

that we dealt with in the IEC standard, and I want 10

to make sure people are aware of the difference 11

between additional functions and special features in 12

the standard. The additional functions are 13

functio ns that are not required for the basic 14

operation of the device, so this might include, 15

let’s say, an FM radio, set top box, something like 16

that. And so in IEC, those additional functions are 17

turned off so that we are really comparing the TV 18

set function, apples to apples. 19

In addition, though, there are special 20

functions, and these are, as I said, functions that 21

are related to, but not required to the basic 22

operation of the device, and the key thing is it’s 23

related to the basic operation. So including, but 24

not limited to, special sound processing, power 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 1 71 saving features, like automatic brightness control. 1

So, yeah, if you have special processing to make 2

your TV look good, you test it with that on. If 3

it’s on by default, because it’s related to the 4

tele vision. If it’s a toaster that’s cloned into 5

the TV, you leave that off, or turn that off. 6

MR. BROOKMAN: And you were reading 7

definitions from the IEC there? 8

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, that’s from IEC. 9

MR. BROOKMAN: So those will be in your 10

comments. 11

MR. FAIRHURST: That’s right, and I would 12

recommend that DOE follow the same basic guidelines 13

for determining the difference between whether a 14

function or feature should be left on or possibly 15

turned off. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. That’s 17

helpful . Very helpful. 18

MR. YODER: So currently DOE is proposing 19

to test the following modes as we’ve stated earlier 20

in the NOPR, it’s proposed to include the standby 21

passive mode, and standby active high mode. Standby 22

active high mode incorporates the downlo ad 23

acquisition mode test outlined by CEA. 24

DOE also considered testing in other 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 172 standby modes, but is not currently proposing that 1

they be tested in the NOPR, including standby active 2

low, and

– question? 3

MR. BROOKMAN: Sorry. So, Adam. 4

MR. GOLDBERG: This is Adam from 5

Mitsubishi. I understand that DOE is not proposing 6

testing anything but active mode, but I wonder if 7

you could take a moment and tell me what it is. 8

Because I don’t

– I wasn’t able to understand what 9

the difference between standby pas sive and standby 10

active low were. 11

MR. YODER: Standby passive

– it’s our 12

understanding that standby passive is when the 13

television is not connected to an outside source, 14

but can be turned on, like via a remote. Standby 15

active high is when it’s connected an outside 16

source, say, the internet, and is actively 17

transferring information to the television; and 18

standby active low is when it’s connected by not 19

transferring information. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon . Well, let’s let

– 21

Adam are you finished? 22

MR. GOLDBERG : Connected? 23

MR. YODER: It’s enabled to transfer 24

information but it’s not currently transferring 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 173 information. 1

MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, but standby active 2

high would have to include things like

– 3

MR. YODER: Streaming

– 4

MR. GOLDBERG: No, let me fini sh. Standby 5

active high would have to include things like 6

completely unrelated to the internet, it wakes up 7

and does some housekeeping, for example, plays with 8

the antenna, right? 9

MR. YODER: Correct. If it’s transferring 10

information, yes. 11

MR. GOLDBE RG: Okay. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 13

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, Jon Fairhurst. I 14

can clarify a little bit of standby active low, it’s 15

not necessarily connected to the internet to get 16

data later on, but is connected to an external 17

signal that can turn the tel evision on. So unlike 18

just an IR source that turns it on, you might be 19

able to turn the TV on at a given time from the 20

internet, I don’t know, to convince the local 21

burglars that you’re at home. But the key is that 22

you might need to have a higher level 23

mi croprocessor, communication circuit available, to 24

listen for this external turn on signal. And so I 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 174 would agree that it’s not necessary for televisions, 1

but this does become more important on the display 2

side, because

– so, for instance, with large 3

displa ys at retail or something, you might have some 4

computer system that can turn the TVs on and off 5

remotely with a signal, as compared to at home where 6

it’s done with an IR remote control, and can be done 7

with a much lower power circuit. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay . Thank you. So you 9

can see the comment boxes. DOE seeks comments from 10

interested parties on consideration of testing the 11

internet as part of on mode, standby active high 12

mode, and standby active low mode. We’ve already 13

received some comment on this, a nd clarification. 14

Additional comments? 15

I haven’t heard anybody saying yet they 16

think this is pretty good. Not that I’m fishing for 17

it, mind you. Bill. 18

MR. SCHLINDER: I think this is pretty 19

good. 20

(Laughter.) 21

PARTICIPANT: (Comment off mic.) 22

MR. SCHLINDER: I’m simply, you know, 23

maybe adding or requesting a little added 24

clarification, because as we all know that 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 175 communication of all these devices is becoming 1

extremely, not necessarily complicated, it’s just

– 2

it’s like a spider web, everything talks to 3

everything these days. 4

The standby passive mode is easy, that’s 5

the same thing as the sleep mode in Energy Star, 6

because it’s just not connected to anything. That’s 7

my understanding. 8

Standby active high mode, if it’s really 9

the same thing as DAM testing, okay, that’s good, 10

but the DAM test procedure in CEA

– it says that it 11

can do any kind of data transfer. I mean, if was 12

first conceived of as downloading, primarily channel 13

listing information from video

- on

- demand devices in 14

hotel ro oms. But then subsequently started to 15

include internet updates of the firmware of the TV, 16

and then finally it was just decided that it would 17

include any data exchange, as long as you could list 18

it, and then determine the usage of that data 19

exchange over a 24 hour period, and then the DAM was 20

allowed, in this case, 40 watt hours of usage per 21

day. And if that’s what’s envisioned there, then 22

that works because it’s a general transfer of data. 23

The problem there is how to estimate the usage of 24

the internet, f or example. So that becomes a little 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 176 problematic in defining it. 1

And the last one that you have, which is a 2

standby active low mode, I guess my understanding on 3

that is it’s just connected but not actively 4

transferring data, and that can probably be tes ted 5

rather easily, just in the displays mode, they’re 6

saying that the physical layer would be activated, 7

is a handshaking between the network and the device, 8

but there is no active data transfer. And if that’s 9

the understanding, then that could probably b e done 10

also. 11

So I guess it’s the one that is at standby 12

active high mode, you know, the way the test would 13

be done is one could do the DAM test, but the DAM 14

test, again, you’re supposed to estimate the usage 15

over 24 hours, and I’m not sure how you do t hat any 16

more because these TVs are connected to the internet 17

with all these aps and how do you ever estimate that 18

people are going to be using aps for a certain 19

amount of time during the day. So the CEA DAM 20

procedure is problematic from that standpoint. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: I would clarify that in 23

the context of standby, then the usage of the aps 24

doesn’t really apply. To date we haven’t seen 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 177 televisions

– and typically hard drives are large 1

storage devices

– so they’re not downloading m ovies 2

or something like that overnight. And because of 3

the intense pressure to keep costs low, I don’t 4

expect that to change in the near future, so for 5

that reason, I just recently checked with our 6

factory, and when in standby, the internet 7

connection is truly disabled even if it’s connected. 8

There is a difficulty with

– in terms of 9

if you start testing with the internet connected 10

beyond just a physical connection through a router 11

or something like this, is it could be difficult to 12

determine is there som e connection to an outside 13

server. So if you’re testing in the DOE building, 14

you may find that oh, it’s not, because I’m behind 15

this firewall. Or if you’re in Japan, you may oh, 16

it’s not because that service is blocked to IP 17

addresses within North Americ a. So it becomes 18

difficult to understand what’s going on once you 19

start connecting to outside sources. So, for 20

repeatability, it’s best if at a maximum, it would 21

be connected to a disconnected box, if you will. 22

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Those were useful 23

c omments. Thank you for that. Additional comments 24

before we move on. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 178 MR. YODER: Could you clarify what you 1

mean by a disconnected box? 2

MR. FAIRHURST: A box that is not 3

connected to the internet at large, so in other 4

words, the TV might be connected to a local hub or 5

router, but that router or hub should not be 6

connected to the internet at large. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: It would be powered for 8

that local use. 9

MR. FAIRHURST: Right. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Adam. 11

MR. GOLDBERG: I mean for

– so, if you 12

eve r look at the back of a connection, an Ethernet 13

check, there’s typically two LEDs, one is lit when 14

there’s a good connection, that is it’s connected to 15

something on the other end of the wire, and the 16

other is usage that’s always blinking. And I think 17

what Jon is trying to say is that blinking makes the 18

test not terribly repeatable. You don’t know what’s 19

coming and it depends on what’s on your local 20

network, what’s on the outsider network, what’s 21

going on, whether you’ve got file sharing turned on 22

in one o f your computers on the subnet, and whether 23

the router’s blocking that stuff, et cetera, et 24

cetera, et cetera. I mean you almost need to

– if 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 179 you’re just going to measure what’s the consumption 1

of the device with the IP hardware active, then you 2

need to i solate it from any communications, by 3

making it just connected to a hub, but not connect 4

that hub to anything else, right, so that the 5

communication hardware is doing something, that is, 6

it’s on, but it’s not spending cycles trying to 7

process anything that comes in over that connection. 8

If that’s where you’re going with that, Jon , right? 9

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, that’s correct. The 10

– it’s mainly because

– well, I expect that when the 11

television is in standby mode it’s typically not 12

communicating, but it co uld

– there could be some 13

power draw off if it’s connected, so there might be 14

something to consider. 15

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. Yes. 16

MR. KUNDU : Just a quick clarification. 17

So DOE is proposing to, in the NOPR, to test standby 18

passive and stand by active high, but not proposing 19

standby active low? 20

MR. YODER: Correct. 21

MR. KUNDU : Or with internet? 22

MR. YODER: Correct. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks, Bijit

. 24

MR. KUNDU : Can you maybe repeat the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 180 rationale for that, at least for not testing with 1

t he internet connection? 2

MR. YODER: The rationale behind not 3

testing with internet connected is because of the 4

variability. But if there are interested parties 5

willing to comment as to a proposed test method, 6

we’d consider it. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 8

M R. GOLDBERG: You might also consider, 9

speaking to Bijit here, whether there are any 10

devices, any television devices for sale in the US 11

that have any modes which could be considered 12

standby active low. There may not be. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Bill. 14

MR. SCHLINDER: Yeah, to Jon Fairhurst’s 15

point, I believe he’s absolutely right that with 16

consumer TVs, because they don’t have the discs and 17

all that, they’re not doing a whole lot in standby 18

in terms of connectivity. With the displays, which 19

is not TVs, with displays, I guess what I was 20

thinking about was professional displays that have 21

to be woken up by controllers and are going over 22

Ethernet connections

– they’re not actually talking 23

to the internet, but it’s a control portway, and 24

therefore under stan dby it has to be able to be 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 181 controlled by an Ethernet port, not necessarily 1

internet connection. So that’s the issue for 2

displays. So maybe for TVs it would be fine to just 3

not test the passive

– active low, as you’re 4

suggesting. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Jon , yes. 6

MR. FAIRHURST: In regarding displays, it 7

might be RS232, RS422

– they’re different means to 8

implement active standby low, but they don’t really 9

apply to TVs. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Charlie. 11

MR. STEPHENS: You were just saying about 12

the repe atability, and not wanting content, 13

necessarily being exchanged because of repeatability 14

issues. Isn’t that what I’m reading in standby 15

active high? I’m reading the last words in there, 16

“and is exchanging/receiving data from an external 17

source.” Isn’t t hat what you said might cause a 18

repeatability problem? 19

MR. YODER: There’s variability when 20

connected to the internet, and we propose the 21

download acquisition mode test and the reason that

– 22

it’s in standby mode, and there is

– there is 23

inherent variabil ity, I’m assuming, in the 24

procedure. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 182 MR. STEPHENS: All I wondering is how, you 1

know, it says there “is exchanging/receiving 2

information from an external source.” What is that 3

and how do we avoid variability under that, in that 4

test? 5

MR. ROTOLO: Corr ect me if I’m wrong, I 6

think before you were talking about the reason why 7

we were not implementing standby active low. And 8

I’ll just say this

– the reason we’re not 9

implementing standby active low is because we 10

compared data to standby passive and standby active 11

low and we saw no noticeable difference between the 12

two modes, and therefore we saw no reason to do that 13

additional test on that mode. 14

Now for standby active high, that is in

– 15

we test that in accordance with the DAM test, where 16

we connected ei ther with an external cable signal or 17

an Ethernet signal, and over

– like Bill said, it’s 18

an estimation of

– in that 24 hour period of usage 19

characteristics. Now if it’s something like a 20

firmware update, that’s considered an infrequent 21

update that’s not f actored into the usage 22

characteristics. I’m not sure if that answers your 23

question. 24

MR. STEPHENS: Not entirely. I’m kind of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 183 wondering, I mean, is there any

– I mean how would 1

you use that information or is there any data that 2

we have that sort of says how you would factor the 3

results of that test into anything subsequent to the 4

test? 5

MR. ROTOLO: Well, the test does define 6

what a frequent and what an infrequent data usage 7

is, and so something like a periodic update over a 8

cable, over a cable signal, like a menu update

– you 9

know, the traditional sense was it was used for 10

hotels and they would send data over the network and 11

they would update the TV itself, and that would be 12

the increase in power in a standby mode. So that 13

frequent ness

– you can pinpoi nt the specific time 14

when, you know, roughly when this update will happen 15

or for some type of duration. In a case like that, 16

that would be seen as what we’re trying to define as 17

standby active high. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: I see Bill has a comment 19

here. Bill. 20

MR. SCHLINDER: Anthony, I totally agree. 21

Maybe I could add just a little bit of input, 22

because Bijit , you were involved when the DAM was 23

developed and we had lots of calls and things. Jon 24

Fairhurst is right in cutting the confusion relative 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 184 to the inte rnet and all that, in that all these aps 1

on TVs that are very, very popular these days, 2

aren’t really doing anything in standby mode, so 3

it’s not really necessary to worry about the 4

internet connection. 5

When these consumer TVs do wake up on 6

standby to actually communicate, is really our 7

hospitality TVs

– they’re called hospitality TVs 8

that you find in all the hotel rooms. Those hotel 9

rooms have servers for video on demand where they 10

can charge you for movies, they can tell you about 11

their restaurants a nd everything else. And they 12

need to update the TV with the latest video on 13

demand, and channel listing information. They do 14

that on a very regular basis, and that’s what the 15

DAM procedure calls out. It’s specific, if you look 16

at the Energy Star TV spec , it’s actually in the 17

hospitality TVs unique testing, and those TVs are 18

the only ones that actually do the DAM. 19

On a rare instance, you might have a TV 20

connected to the internet that has advanced 21

functionality that needs to get downloaded, a new 22

firmw are update, and it’s not a hospitality TV, it’s 23

just a TV that talks to the internet, and 24

occasionally the manufacturer will come in, wake the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 185 TV up and say I’ve got to give you new firmware. 1

We’ve gotten some new feature or something. But 2

that is so imp ossible to predict, it might be once a 3

year, it might be once a month, who knows? And it’s 4

very, very minimal power usage, so that part really 5

doesn’t need to be considered. It’s considered 6

infrequent and not tested. 7

The things that are tested are for 8

hospitality TVs, where you can predict a regular, 9

almost once a day, updating of the channel 10

information for the video on demand function in 11

these TVs. They’re specialized TVs. They’re almost 12

industrial TVs in that you’re selling them to 13

hotels. And tha t’s what the DAM mode is envisioned 14

to handle. So, we are testing for that, but really, 15

the TVs that are subject to DAM are those unique 16

hospitality TVs, not really consumer TVs. And I 17

guess from the definition, I suppose those still 18

fall in, even though they’re sold to companies, you 19

know, hotels, they’re still being considered as in 20

scope for this testing, hospitality TVs? That’s my 21

question, I guess. 22

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic. 23

MR. PETROLATI: Bill, to be perfectly 24

honest, we couldn’t find a reason to nec essarily 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 186 exclude them at this point. Based on

– and Celia, 1

you might want to add something to this

– some of 2

the guidance that has been developed within the 3

Office of General Counsel, and they’re indicating 4

that there have to be special features that make the 5

television or any product, different from the 6

consumer product that is sold. And we couldn’t find 7

anything from a physical standpoint, that made the 8

hospitality television different than the consumer 9

television, the typical consumer television. So a t 10

this point, yes, you’re correct, they’re still in 11

the scope. 12

MR. SCHLINDER: In response to that, 13

that’s

– if you look at the TV in your hotel room 14

from the front, it looks just like pretty much any 15

other TV. On the back, it will generally, and in 16

the definition for hospitality TV, it’ll have to 17

have another jack, which if you look at the set

- top 18

box that’s behind the TV, not only do you have the 19

signal coax, but you also have another low level 20

signal, not modulated, that is a control signal to 21

the set

- top box, and then you have the software 22

talking between the set

- top box and the TV in order 23

to accomplish this channel downloading information. 24

So that really isn’t part of a consumer TV, and if 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 187 this is only for consumer TVs, it might simplify 1

matters to not view that as

– it’s not a huge 2

concern of ours, it’s just something that from a 3

legal standpoint, you could, perhaps, exclude them 4

if you wish to. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Adam. 6

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, Vic, if your 7

question is, are hospitality TVs in any way 8

physically different from what you go to Best Buy 9

and purchase, the answer is yes, they’re different. 10

Right, Bill? 11

MR. SCHLINDER: They’re different. 12

They’re sold in a different distribution system. 13

You don’t buy them from Best Buy. They in our 14

professional TV group. It’s a completely different 15

sales group. We have our consumer sales group and 16

then we have a professional services sales group, 17

and they handle the hospitality TVs. They’re a 18

completely different product number. They’re not 19

distr ibuted through consumer channels. Yes, you can 20

buy them on line if you really, for some reason, 21

needed one. Maybe you’re a ma and pa hotel operator 22

and you’re just going to buy ten and you don’t even 23

want to go through normal sales channels, you could 24

bu y them on line, but that’s not really a typical 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 188 consumer, and it is different in that it has this 1

connector. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 3

MR. GOLDBERG: Bill, but they are 4

physically different? 5

MR. SCHLINDER: Physically different in 6

that they have the extra connector. 7

MR. PETROLATI: And Bill, if you could 8

supply us maybe some information as to the physical 9

difference, for Panasonic, and do you know that this 10

physical difference exists for all manufacturers? 11

MR. SCHLINDER: Yes, because

– first of 12

all, t he answer to the first question, I will talk 13

with the services group to get you the information 14

to distinguish our product. 15

MR. PETROLATI: Right. 16

MR. SCHLINDER: Secondly, the Energy Star 17

definition, and Bijit knows, right? You’re a good 18

man, Bijit

. Hospitality television

– I’m reading 19

from the Energy Star TV spec. “A television product 20

which includes the following features: 21

**•** A. A control port for bidirectional 22

communications, DB

- 9, RJ11, RJ12, RJ45 coaxial 23

cable, or HDMI

- CEC; 24Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 189

**•** B. Activated hospita lity protocol software: 1

SmartPort, MPI, MTI, serial protocol, to 2

provide direct access to video on demand 3

systems or digital media player designed for 4

hospitality specific applications, and 5

**•** C. A power sta te that meets the definition of 6

download acquisit ion mode.” 7

And then, to read from download 8

acquisition mode, because I think it might be 9

helpful, “Download acquisition mode, the power mode 10

in which a product is connected to the main’s power 11

source, provides neither sound nor picture, and is 12

actively d ownloading data. Data downloads may 13

include channel listing information for use by an 14

electronic programming guide, TV set up data, 15

channel map updates, firmware updates, monitoring 16

for emergency messaging communications, or other 17

network communications.” 18

So it was really designed to be for these 19

hospitality TV applications. And I’ll supply the 20

differentiator physically of those devices, and I 21

believe all our competitors in that industry are 22

doing the same thing. 23

MR. PETROLATI: Okay. And I’m not sur e if 24Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 190 it’s been officially declared, but my understanding 1

is that FTC has already made a legal ruling that 2

the hospitality television is, in fact, a consumer 3

television, covered under the labeling program. 4

Okay. But bottom line, anything you can provide us 5

will be helpful. I do want to mention that this 6

test procedure is also being developed for the 7

Environmental Protection Agency as part of its 8

Energy Star program. And we would probably include 9

the DAM testing in there, even if we determined it 10

wasn’t fo r a consumer product. But we’ll have to 11

check on that as well. 12

MR. SCHLINDER: Yeah, that would make 13

total sense. And as I said, I don’t have an 14

objection to this, and I’ll be able to supply that 15

information to you and since that EPA would want to 16

use that procedure, then putting that test 17

procedure makes total sense. 18

MR. PETROLATI: Yep. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam, I thought you were 20

making a multi

- step point, and you just got one 21

done. 22

MR. GOLDBERG: If I was

– 23

MR. BROOKMAN: It’s lost. 24

MR. GOLDBE RG:

-- I have no idea what it 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 191

was. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Jon , you want in 2

here? 3

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, if we’ve

– I guess 4

one last comment on the hospitality thing is that 5

Sharp’s televisions are also

– the hospitality 6

televisions are unique models sold through a uni que 7

sales chain as wel l. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: And of course the 9

Department of Energy is looking for characteristics 10

that would differentiate it, supply chain? Yes? 11

Yes. 12

MR. FAIRHURST: All those characteristics 13

are also similar to what Bill r ead. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 15

MR. FAIRHURST: If it’s appropriate to go 16

back to the networking testing, I’ve got some 17

additional information that may be helpful. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 19

MR. FAIRHURST: As I mentioned, we 20

wouldn’t want to connect to the outside internet, 21

but it’s also questionable whether or not we would 22

want to require being connected physically to a 23

hub. Sharp’s initial, what was it, two or three 24

years of internet connected televisions, were wired 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 192 internet connections only, and the in itial data 1

there that I shared in a different context 2

publicly, was that that’s on the order of

– it was 3

on the order of a ten percent connect rate. So it 4

was not an extremely high connect rate. Definitely 5

the minority of people that have active internet 6

cables in the locations where there televisions 7

are. Since then we’ve moved to a wireless 8

implementation. I don’t have numbers to share 9

right now about how many connect, but I would think 10

that much of the standby testing has happened in 11

the presence of Wi

- Fi signals. So I think we’re 12

already doing standby testing that, in some cases, 13

there’s no Wi

- Fi signals, and sometimes

-- some 14

cases there are. So because of that I believe that 15

manufacturers typically, when they go into standby, 16

are disabling the w ireless feature, because that 17

would consume additional power that would put us 18

above the Energy Star requirement of one watt. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Chris. 20

MR. CALWELL: T his is Chris Calwell. I 21

just wanted to make sure I followed the one set of 22

comments that were made on DAM, because it went 23

back and forth a little bit. I understand that 24

it’s commonly done in hospitality TVs, but was the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 193 comment that DAM does not occur in the consumer 1

versions of the TVs, or simply that it’s rare or 2

infrequent? 3

MR. GOLDBER G: It’s different. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam, use the mic. 5

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry. It’s just 6

different. For hospitality TVs there is some sort 7

of local server in the basement of the hotel and 8

there’s additional communication needed for things 9

like pay per view and things, right. For 10

televisions

– consumer televisions, in a consumer 11

environment that use a DAM mode to download, for 12

example, program guide data, those things do happen 13

differently

– it takes a different amount of power 14

over a different period o f time and different duty 15

cycle characteristics and things. It’s just 16

different. 17

MR. CALWELL: And so is there

– have CEA 18

or others developed two different test procedures 19

for those two different circumstances? Or how 20

would you measure the consumer cir cumstance? 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill? 22

MR. GOLDBERG: All right, give me half a 23

shot at it. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam, please. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 194 MR. GOLDBERG: My recollection is that the 1

way it’s measured is you characterize how much time 2

it spends in the mode and you find a way to force 3

it into the mode, and you measure its consumption 4

while it’s in that mode. Part of the difficulties 5

in measuring this is without a whole live network 6

behind it, I mean if you bring one of these TVs 7

home and you plug it in, sometime overnight it’s 8

going to check for guide data, but you don’t know 9

when that’s going to be exactly, and it’s difficult 10

to, in a completely live system, force it to. And 11

so there’s a bit of prod it into the right mode and 12

then measure it. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill, you wa nt to add on? 14

MR. SCHLINDER: Energy Star only allows a 15

DAM allowance for hospitality TVs. So, that’s

– 16

again, in there for hospitality TVs. They do it a 17

little differently. They do what’s called total 18

energy consumption , TEC, and they add five hours of 19

on mode, 19 hours of standby, and then they add 40 20

watt hours of DAM

– that’s your maximum, 40 watt 21

hours over a day. Now, how do you get there? You 22

go to the CEA DAM procedure, and they say there’s 23

an ideal test procedure which is very cumbersome in 24

that you have to supply 24 hour complete data 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 195 stream, encapsulating all of this, and no one does 1

it that way, probably. 2

The way we do it, is you do the practical 3

approaches to procedures. And the practical 4

approach allows you to actually measure the p ower 5

that’s coming in when it’s connected and 6

downloading, and then what you do is you say well, 7

how long does it take to do the downloading? And 8

if it’s two hours, then you multiply two hours 9

times the power, and there’s a spreadsheet that’s 10

supplied. A nd then you add it all up and it better 11

be less than 40 watt hours when you’re done. So 12

it’s an estimation based upon the power 13

instantaneously used when it’s in this active 14

downloading mode, and then you estimate the time 15

and do the multiplication and ge t your watt hours. 16

But the whole procedure, as far as Energy 17

Star is concerned, is only applicable for 18

hospitality TVs. For consumer models doing DAM, 19

the ones that I know about are the ones that are 20

just doing firmware updates. Every now and then 21

th ey get woken up by a network that says you need 22

new software, and that’s just impossible to 23

estimate. Now if there’s some TVs that are using 24

electronic programming guide as consumers, well 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 196 that’s a different story, and it’s not being 1

covered by hospitalit y TVs. That’s all, you know, 2

as technology evolves, there are possibilities that 3

we haven’t considered. 4

MR. CALWELL: Thanks for the 5

clarification, because really, in the trade 6

literature, it’s hard to keep up. There are 7

references to Rovi I believe, p ushing out more 8

multi

- media content with the electronic program 9

guide

– photographs of the stars that are in the 10

movie, and associated data. And so I just didn’t 11

know if test procedures had kept pace with that or 12

if the presumption is just it’s a small am ount of 13

TVs for a small amount of time. 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks, Chris. 15

We’re going to

– yes. 16

MR. KUNDU : Do you have a clarification

– 17

Bijit Kundu with Energy Solutions

– DOE mentioned 18

you tested televisions with an internet connection 19

and saw n o change? Is that right? Or no power 20

difference? 21

MR. YODER: We have the data in the next 22

few slides. 23

MR. KUNDU : Okay. 24

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. And at this time 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 197 it’s appropriate to move on. So we’re going there 1

now. 2

MR. YODER: So DOE did some testing when 3

the television was connected to the internet but 4

was not actively transferring information. In the 5

standby passive mode it tested the television with 6

no connections and when it only had a HDMI 7

connection. It also tested standby active low 8

m ode, when it was connected to a cable , connected 9

to the internet, and connected to wireless. 10

This next page, you can use it as a 11

reference, indicates the energy consumption, the 12

power consumption, when connected to these inputs. 13

MR. PETROLATI: Chris, were there any 14

differences at all to point out? 15

MR. YODER: There was one difference in 16

the 15

- inch CCFL, there was a difference of about 17

point two watts. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Right there. Okay. 19

MR. KUNDU : Bijit with Energy Solutions 20

again. Jon , maybe I misheard you. Were you saying 21

there was a ten percent

– you saw sets with a ten 22

percent increase, is that right? 23

MR. FAIRHURST: No, that was ten percent 24

of consumers who bought connectors

– TVs with 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 198 Ethernet connectors actually connect them. 1

MR. K UNDU : Oh, I misunderstood that. 2

Okay. 3

MR. FAIRHURST: It’s because we have 4

Ethernet connectors in our home offices, but not 5

typically near our entertainment centers. 6

PARTICIPANT: Speak for yourself, Jon

. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill, go ahead. 8

MR. SCHLINDER: I’m sorry, I do have a 9

slight clarification looking at the Energy Star 10

Specification . Everything I said was correct 11

relative to the hospitality TVs and the TEC, total 12

energy consumption. However, prior to that, 13

there’s a Section 3.6 that appa rently allows a non

14

hospitality TV to be tested for DAM. It says, “A 15

product may automatically exit standby passive mode 16

and enter download acquisition mode according to a 17

predefined schedule in order to download channel 18

listing information, monitor for e mergency 19

messaging, communicate via network protocol. The 20

measured DAM energy consumption for all DAM states 21

shall be less than or equal to 40 watt hours per 22

day.” So we don’t offer the EPG, that electronic 23

programming guide, on consumer TVs, only on the 24

hospitality, but I imagine that other manufacturers 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 199 might do that, and if so then they’re apparently 1

needing to measure that according to our CEA DAM 2

procedure and be within 40 watt hours. And so from 3

that standpoint, once again, Vic, it makes perfect 4

se nse for you to have that in the procedure. 5

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Moving on. 6

MR. YODER: Here the slide just indicates 7

that we are proposing to incorporate the CEA 8

download acquisition mode test, and provides the 9

definition. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: And this is precisely their 11

definition? 12

MR. YODER: This is Energy Star’s. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: Energy Star’s definition, 14

which has been accepted. Comments on this 15

definition? 16

MR. YODER: We did, however, believe that 17

the CEA download acquisition mode test could be 18

improved upon by indicating a hierarchy of input 19

formats as seen here, including Wi

- Fi , Ethernet, 20

thunderbolt, USB, firewire, and others. Are there 21

comments pertaining to the hierarchy of inputs? 22

MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 23

MR. STEPHENS: Just a quick one . How did 24

you establish the hierarchy, or how would you 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 200 establish it? 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Anthony. 2

MR. YODER: This was generated by

-- 3

MR. ROTOLO: First off, I’d just like to 4

point out like Jon was saying, so Wi

- Fi was 5

selected as the number one, just because Ethernet, 6

you don’t tend to see it as a connection, but also 7

this is a similar proposed hierarchy that the 8

Energy Star display team is using as well. And DOE 9

– this is one of the points that DOE is requesting 10

comments upon stakeholders to see if, you know, 11

what their thoughts on this hierarchy is. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 13

MR. GOLDBERG: Yes, so this is

– this came 14

from a displays proceeding, right? 15

MR. ROTOLO: That’s correct. 16

MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. So that explains 17

thunderbolt in front of USB, for example. 18

MR. ROTOLO: Primarily, yes, it’s 19

primarily display oriented technology. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Does this application 21

change the hierarchy? 22

MR. GOLDBERG: I’d suggest that in a 23

television environment, USB would be slightly more 24

likely than thund erbolt, but none of the m are 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 201 likely at all. I mean, guessing. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Other comments on

– Jon

– 2

the hierarchy? 3

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, I would say that 4

while a television may have a USB or firewire port, 5

they’re typically not used for download acquisition 6

mode. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: We have additional comment. 8

Please say your name. 9

MR. ZHUMAGALI: This is Bizhan Zhum agali 10

from ICF International. Just had a question. Wi

11

Fi was just said to be the primary or the most 12

prevalent connection for TVs. But on the previous 13

slide, on the data slide, there was only one TV 14

that was tested with wireless, was that because the 15

ot her TVs did not have wireless capability? 16

MR. YODER: That’s correct. They 17

physically did not have the capability to connect 18

wirelessly. 19

MR. ZHUMAGALI: And at the same time we 20

see about four or five that have Ethernet. 21

MR. YODER: Those particular TVs, not all 22

the TVs that DOE tested , had full network 23

capabilities. All network capabilities were 24

tested, so at the 47

- inch LED TV had all forms of 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 202 that connection. The other few that were only 1

tested with Ethernet, those were only tested 2

because they d idn’t have wireless connections. 3

MR. ZHUMAGALI: I guess maybe this is a 4

question to industry and everybody. Do we think 5

that wireless is still the main connection seen in 6

TVs overall? 7

MR. BROOKMAN: For the record, several 8

individuals from industry are shaking their heads 9

“yes.” Okay. Thanks for the question. Jon , go 10

ahead. 11

MR. FAIRHURST: I have a question actually 12

about the hierarchy, not for the download 13

acquisition mode, but I didn’t see a discussion of 14

the hierarchy for the actually video input signals. 15

So if it’s appropriate, I have some comments on 16

that. 17

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, sure. 18

MR. FAIRHURST: Very good. C urrently the 19

NOPR shows the order of HDMI/DBI

– 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon , say what you’re 21

referring to. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: Yes, so this is

– let’s 23

see it’s 4.5 input cable, in the NOPR. So it’s in 24

the Federal Register page 286 5. “Testing shall be 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 203 performed using an HDMI cable. If the TV does not 1

have an HDMI input, the following inputs shall be 2

used in the following order.” And it prioritizes 3

HDMI/DVI and VGA component and so forth. And 4

actually I would say that the DVI and VGA may not 5

be as appropriate for the primary spots because 6

when connected to those connections, the television 7

assumes that it’s a PC and some televisions are 8

known to go into a different gamma curve. So the 9

brightness curve of the television may actually be 10

different. So I would think that the component 11

analog connection would be the second most likely 12

high definition connection for video devices. Now 13

whether or not we get into s

- video composite and 14

where those rank with the computer connections, 15

that’s another story. But a component is frequently 16

provided on set

- top boxes. Set

- top boxes typical ly 17

do not have VGA or DVI outputs. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Adam. 19

MR. GOLDBERG: So, backing up what Jon 20

said. First, it’s not clear what’s meant by 21

HDMI/DV I as different from HDMI. I think the NOPR 22

says to use HDMI, and if you don’t have that use 23

HDMI/ DVI, whatever that is. I’m not clear what it 24

is. If what’s meant is DVI, then both DVI and VGA 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 204 are really PC interfaces, and in addition to gamma 1

differences, as Jon was talking about, there’s also 2

a lot of resolution differences. That is, when a 3

displa y think it’s being used as a computer 4

monitor, it’s going to try to do, you know, one 5

pixel per pixel display and no smoothing or 6

filtering, or at least a different set. That is, 7

the device will act completely unlike a television. 8

So I’d suggest that it should be HDMI component as 9

video composite, in that order, and drop the PC 10

interfaces entirely. 11

MR. BROOKMAN: Jon

. 12

MR. FAIRHURST: Thank you. And on my desk 13

for doing video editing, I actually have a TV 14

connected to a computer using DVI. And Adam i s 15

absolutely correct, it works differently with that 16

connection than with the expected video 17

connections. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: Bill, did you have 19

something? Yes, Bill. 20

MR. SCHLINDER: I haven’t printed out, but 21

in my notes, the Energy Star actually prohibit s the 22

VGA connection from being used. And it’s in my 23

notes and I can check it, but you all can check it 24

too. For the exact reason that the VGA enters a 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 205 different color space and it’s just not

– it’s just 1

not used for TVs. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: That’s an actua l

– that’s a 3

specification in Energy Star? 4

MR. SCHLINDER: Energy Star, when they 5

talk about in the test method, according to my 6

notes, it says that it’s not allowed by Energy Star 7

to be used, the VGA. 8

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. I just wanted to 9

clarify the source. 10

MR. SCHLINDER: Test signal. Input cable. 11

Here it is. The DOE NOPR, section 4.5 for input 12

cable, “Testing shall be used in an HDMI input 13

cable. If the TV does not have an HDMI input, the 14

following inputs shall be used, HDMI/DVI, VGA, 15

componen t, s

- video, and composite.” And then my 16

notes say “Energy Star states that VGA shall not b e 17

used.” Energy Star only allows HDMI or component 18

interfaces. We can check that, but that’s what my 19

notes day. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 21

MR. SCHLINDER: So that’ s the VGA. What 22

Jon was talking about on the input, can I just 23

backup, please to the standby active hierarchy of 24

signals for CEA DAM test? 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 206 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah. 1

MR. SCHLINDER: Great. We, again, the 2

hospitality TVs communicate the DAM through the 3

main s signal cable, so think of the main video 4

interface. We modulate to the set top box, along 5

that cable, all of the download information, okay. 6

So that’s why Energy Star was modified to say that 7

download acquisition will occur, download 8

acquisition mode, in addition to be going through 9

those types of sources could actually come down 10

through the main signal interface, because we 11

combine both the download data and the video signal 12

on that one cable, on the hospitality TVs. Because 13

in our case, the set top box functionality is very 14

different than many, so we integrate a lot of 15

things, which ultimately saves power. When you 16

integrate functionality and you eliminate boxes, as 17

we all know, that capability will cost a little 18

power, but on a system

- wide basis, i t saves power. 19

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 20

MR. GOLDBERG: So any fully consumer 21

device that’s using, like we were talking about, 22

the Rovi download earlier

– that stuff is at least 23

a lot of time, in band as well. That is, before 24

Wi

- Fi it comes to the broadcast channel

-- cable, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 207 or whatever it is. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Your name please. 2

MS. RODULOVIS: This is Verna Rodulovis 3

from Energy Star, and a question for Bill. So what 4

you’re saying that that particular hierarchy is not 5

necessary f or the DAM testing because they have 6

their own cable. But that particular hierarchy 7

would be better suited for a consumer television 8

that doesn’t have

– that isn’t a hospitality 9

television if you wanted to test it in the standby 10

– I guess standby active, or I guess no, the 11

standby active low mode, where it’s not necessarily 12

downloading something, but you’re just connecting 13

it? 14

MR. SCHLINDER: Yes, it would be 15

appropriate for

– that hierarchy is appropriate 16

with the exception of what both Adam mentioned f or 17

– he’s saying the consumer TVs will actually do 18

download acquisition over the main video interface. 19

And I’m saying that for hospitality TVs, ours 20

specifically, I know, do the download acquisition 21

over the main coaxial connection. 22

MS. RODULOVIS: So f or the televisions, 23

then, this is still Verna Rodulovis from EPA, so 24

then for the televisions that have Wi

- Fi , is it the 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 208 Wi

- Fi that is primarily downloading it? I think 1

I’m hearing two different things, one that it’s 2

being downloaded from the main connect ion, and then 3

on the other hand, a lot of the TVs have Wi

- Fi

. 4

What’s the

– 5

MR. SCHLINDER: It’s two different 6

applications. The electronic program guide for a 7

hospitality TV is downloaded on the same cable that 8

it’s getting its video signal from. Okay. So that 9

would have to be put at maybe the top of that 10

signal

– a list, you know, we’ve got a list of Wi

11

Fi and then Ethernet

– above Wi

- Fi , we should 12

probably add the primary video signal cable. 13

MS. RODULOVIS: So if an American consumer 14

is downloading something from an ap p , how would 15

that come to the television? Would that co me from 16

the main connection or would that come through Wi

17

Fi ? 18

MR. SCHLINDER: Because it’s going to the 19

internet for downloading an ap p , it would be coming 20

through Wi

- Fi or Ethernet, so that works really 21

well for downloading ap p s, the existing list that 22

you have there, Wi

- Fi and Ethernet. But since the 23

DAM test also includes electronic program guide, 24

then we should just augment this list to include 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 209 the main video signal where we have actually 1

multiplexed on top of it, you know, using the same 2

cable, the download acquisition mode for our 3

hospitality TVs. So we just need to add that in 4

there, that if that’s the primary way of getting 5

the electronic programming guide is through your 6

main video feed, then that should probably be 7

primary. 8

And then for con sumer TVs, Adam says some 9

of them do that. And so it would still be primary. 10

But for most consumer TVs, in fact all the 11

Panasonic ones, consumer, we don’t do that. We get 12

our download, if we’re ever going to do any 13

download, through the Ethernet, in whi ch case this 14

Wi

- Fi and Ethernet procedure would be appropriate. 15

MS. RODULOVIS: So in other words, if you 16

had

– the main connection above the Wi

- Fi , that 17

would apply for hospitality televisions and then 18

for those consumer products that do download it 19

tha t way, you’d use that, but if the majority of 20

the consumer products, they would go to number two, 21

which would be Wi

- Fi or Ethernet? 22

MR. SCHLINDER: I believe that to be the 23

case. 24

MS. RODULOVIS: All right. Thank you. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 210 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks. Let’s move on. 1

That was good

– that was good explanatory stuff. 2

Yes, Jon

. 3

MR. FAIRHURST: Back on the video input 4

hierarchy, in Energy Star it does say “HDMI shall 5

be used for display of test signals during testing. 6

If HDMI is not available, then the compon ent 7

interface shall be used. The V GA interface shall 8

not be used.” And I think to expand on this for 9

DOE’s use, to cover all TVs in case they don’t have 10

HDMI or component, that would be rare, but I 11

imagine that those exist, then s

- video and 12

composite vid eo would be next in line. And to 13

parallel what’s gone on with VGA, DVI also probably 14

should not be used. So that’s my recommendation. 15

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. Now this 16

final slide in this segment on off mode. 17

MR. YODER: Yes. So the last mo de in 18

which DOE proposes to include in the NOPR is off 19

mode, testing in the off mode. 20

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 21

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, so

– never mind, 22

sorry. 23

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 24

**Energy Efficiency Metrics** 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 211 MR. YODER: Next we’ll talk about the 1

energy efficiency metrics. DOE

– in the NOPR, DOE 2

is proposing to output multiple metrics by 3

including a luminance ratio, on mode power, standby 4

mode power, and off mode power. Although it’s 5

proposing to have multiple metrics, it has 6

considered a single metric , combining these 7

outputs. The benefit of having multiple outputs is 8

that other rulemaking bodies, such as Energy Star 9

and CEC set different requirements for these modes, 10

and that would not have to be changed. The benefit 11

of a single metric is that it’s calculated within 12

the test procedure and there’s one consistent 13

output across regulating bodies. 14

DOE seeks comments from interested parties 15

about these approaches. Yes. 16

MR. GOLDBERG: Sorry, I’ve jumped ahead a 17

slide and I’m confused why, if H off is zero, why 18

you need to bother measuring what the off mode 19

power consumption might be, if you’re multiplying 20

by zero anyway. I mean, P off is irrelevant if H 21

off is zero. Know what I’m saying? 22

MR. BROOKMAN: You’re talking about the 23

first equation there. 24

MR. YODER: Yeah, let me

– 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 212 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Vic. 1

MR. PETROLATI: Adam, first of all, the 2

equation that you’re referring to, it is not in the 3

rules section of the NOPR, it’s one of two 4

alternatives. We are not at this point, convinced 5

that we are going with the single metric. So 6

that’s why we can’t eliminate it at this point. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: While we’re cogitating on 8

that, let’s back up to 103, issue box 13, you can 9

see the comment request on preliminary decision not 10

to take into account the pos sibility that consumers 11

may switch between preset picture settings. No 12

comments here? So now we’ll go to the next one, 13

and questions about these equations. 14

Clarify for us

– 15

MR. YODER: The on mode metric? 16

MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 17

MR. YODER: The on mode power metric

. 18

This is an equation which calculates the on mode 19

power when ABC is enabled, and it averages out the 20

different power readings when different 21

illuminances are present on the television. You 22

would take the power in that particular 23

illuminance, multiplied by the particular weight 24

associated with that power mode. So that’s that 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 213 equation. 1

The last box outlines the hours associated 2

with the different modes. Seven hours for on mode, 3

and 17 hours for standby passive. 4

MR. BROOKMAN: Vic? 5

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, let me mention that 6

again, for H off as zero, we had very little 7

information in terms of estimating what H off is. 8

TVs are generally not sold with a hard off switch. 9

We’re aware of very few that are sold with a hard 10

switch that is able to turn the TV into completely 11

an off mode where it cannot be switched on by the 12

remote. We would certainly be interested in 13

getting any information if anybody has it, but at 14

this point, H off is being estimated as zero. 15

MR. BROOKMAN: Your name, please. 16

MR. SHAR P: Mark Sharp, Panasonic. I had 17

a question about the hour weightings. Energy Star, 18

as I believe you’re aware, uses a five hours off 19

and 19 hours on for their calculation. I’m 20

guessing that DOE has decided, based on some data 21

or some other information t o change that relative 22

weighting, and I’m curious if you could explain 23

that in more detail. 24

MR. YODER: Yes, in the next few slides, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 214 Louis will talk about how we’ve come to the 1

conclusions that we have. 2

MR. BROOKMAN: Let’s head in that 3

direction. 4

MR

. KUNDU : Before that, Bijit Kundu with 5

Energy Solutions. Just want to get more 6

clarification from the Department. If they went 7

away from having different requirements for the 8

different modes and had the single metric, was the 9

idea that certain televisio ns would only be 10

displaying that specific value, and reporting that 11

to DOE, or would they be reporting all the 12

different inputs that went into that calculation? 13

MR. PETROLATI: First of all, let me 14

respond to that. One, we have no reporting 15

requirements established at this point in time. So 16

I can’t answer that fully. The concern is, 17

programs such as Energy Star, set limits on standby 18

mode power. Using this test procedure with the 19

single metric, this would most likely eliminate 20

that approach, as well a s the approach of 21

California in terms of establishing single 22

metrics. So it’s more of a concern with the single 23

metric approach eliminating some of the flexibility 24

for other programs, tha n it is as to what would be 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 215 reported. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. That was good. 2

MR. SHARP: Thanks. 3

MR. BROOKMAN: That was helpful. Okay. 4

So then, now we’re going to move on. And Louis. 5

**Energy Metrics** 6

MR. DESROCHES: So to answer that 7

question, just to describe very briefly where that 8

seven hours comes from. It co mes from a data set 9

obtained from Nielsen. They have monthly set level 10

viewing statistics that are available, and we 11

purchased data from May 2007 to May 2011. And 12

these data are collected from a representative 13

cross

- section of US households, and as of Ma y 2011, 14

there are roughly 20,000 participating households 15

in the survey. And the viewing hours are obtained 16

by connecting metering device to each television in 17

the participating household, and some households 18

have many, many televisions. And meters are a lso 19

attached to all the peripheral devices to the 20

television, and so it’s possible to get viewing 21

statistics of the television being used in each of 22

its possible formats. So there’s TV used in 23

broadcast, TV used from game consoles, TV used from 24

removable media like Blu

- ray players, TV used from 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 216 recorded DVR content. So you can aggregate all 1

this TV use and it is metered data, as opposed to a 2

survey data, and so this is what the analysis was 3

based on. 4

And so very quickly, the data we separated 5

into a pri mary and non

- primary. The primary 6

television is defined as the television in each 7

household that is used most frequently, so the one 8

television that has the most hours of use, that was 9

called the primary television, and then everything 10

after that was the secondary television or tertiary 11

television, and so on. We could lump all the other 12

televisions as non

- primary. And the reason we did 13

that is because the general usage characteristics 14

of the secondary televisions and tertiary 15

televisions were all about t he same. 16

So you can see here at the top right, this 17

is the distribution of viewing hours across all 18

these households. This is hours per day on the X 19

axis, and the frequency on the Y axis. And for 20

primary televisions, there’s a log normal 21

distribution with a very long tail. And then you 22

can see for non

- primary televisions, that same 23

distribution is sharply peaked at fairly low values 24

and zero values. And this distribution, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 217 qualitatively, was the same whether it was a 1

secondary or a tertiary or so on, television. The 2

average shifted a little bit, as you might expect, 3

from secondary to tertiary, but the qualitative 4

characteristic was the same. So that’s why this 5

separation was done, to distinguish between primary 6

and non

- primary. 7

And over here, this is the average, annual 8

average for the years that were collected for 9

primary and non

- primary. And in both cases, there 10

is a slight trend going up in the last couple of 11

years. And as you can see, for the last full year 12

of data, the average is about seven for primary 13

televisions. 14

So as I just said, the last full year of 15

data, the average daily usage for primary 16

television is seven hours from the Nielsen. This 17

is a robust finding because it comes from an 18

average of over 20,000 participating households, 19

a nd Nielsen is a firm that has a lot of expertise 20

in this area. And just as an aside here, this 21

value is actually in agreement with the average 22

from CLASP, the CLASP room illuminance study, which 23

also had a meter connected to the television in the 24

primary viewing room, and they found, on average, 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 218 about 6.9 hours per day across 60 homes, and so 1

there’s a consistency in this value. And again, 2

it’s been rising over the last several years. 3

So there’s one caveat to this result, 4

which is DOE acknowledges that not every new TV 5

that is purchased today will necessarily become a 6

primary television. As an example, in the Nielsen 7

data set, in the last year, on average about

– for 8

every household 65 percent of the newest 9

televisions in the participating households en ded 10

up being the primary televisions. But for the rest 11

of the 35 percent, the primary television was 12

actually an older model television in the home. 13

And that has risen slightly over the several years 14

of the data set. It used to be about 55 percent in 15

20 07, and then as people are purchasing televisions 16

to replace their older stock, it is more likely 17

that the newest television in the home ends up 18

being the primary television. 19

But at this time, DOE does not have 20

sufficient data to do this analysis properl y on 21

what the probability of new shipments becoming 22

primary televisions. There’s also likely to be a 23

screen size dependence, such that the larger 24

televisions are likely

– more likely to become a 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 219 primary television than smaller televisions. And 1

again, D OE is not aware of the data that we could 2

use to do this kind of analysis. 3

And so if we were to try and do a bit of a 4

proxy calculation and assume somewhat 5

conservatively that 65 percent of televisions 6

purchased today end up being primary, and 35 7

perce nt of televisions being non

- primary, that 8

would result in a blended average which is shown 9

here on the lower left. And again, it’s a 10

qualitatively similar curve to what was shown 11

before for primary televisions, but the average is 12

a bit lower, and the aver age is about five and a 13

half hours. But this is an approximation only, 14

and it is using an estimate of the probability of 15

being a primary television only on the stock of 16

televisions right now, and is not necessarily 17

indicative of what the new television s ales are. 18

And then on the right here is again, just 19

showing this last several years of data, and this 20

is where the blended average would fall. And we’d 21

end up with about five and a half. 22

MR. FAIRHURST: This is Jon Fairhurst. 23

Regarding data as to the which sizes are primary 24

and secondary, the CEA data set does include screen 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 220 size as well as the location, whether or not it’s 1

living room or bedroom, so that might

– that would 2

give some data, not necessarily robust ne arly as 3

Nielsen, but some data anyway. 4

MR. DESROCHES: On that note, the Nielsen 5

data also include the location of the room, and so 6

it may be possible to do some correlation between 7

the probability of being located in one room to the 8

probability of being the primary television, based 9

on the Nielsen data. 10

MR. BROOKMAN: Adam. 11

MR. GOLDBERG: Is the Nielsen data that 12

you acquired available, or would we have to go to 13

Nielsen and buy it again? 14

MR. DESROCHES: We cannot share that. We 15

can share a small s ubsample of it. I think we have 16

the rights to publish ten percent of the full data 17

set, but you’d have to buy that data set yourself. 18

And again, the seven hours here is for the 19

purposes of the single metric, which is being 20

considered by DOE, but it’s no t what’s being 21

proposed in the NOPR. 22

MR. BROOKMAN: Will you post that ten 23

percent or something? 24

MR. DESROCHES: We will eventually post 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 221 the ten percent. 1

MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So you see the 2

comment box at issue E. On the analysis used to 3

determine average on mode hours per day, the 4

assumption to base these hours on those measured 5

for primary TVs and data. And I’d

– also a 6

dependence on screen size, that being a key 7

assumption. Jon

. 8

MR. FAIRHURST: Yeah, Jon Fairhurst. I 9

have a question for DOE regarding the single 10

metric. Is it possible for DOE to do a 11

combination, where we would not report single, but 12

there would be the three, the annual, as well as 13

the standby, as well as the active mode? Because 14

people are used to finding out, oh, how many watts 15

does it use when I’m watching it, and the 16

manufacturers often use that in sales literature, 17

PR reports and so forth. And additionally, FTC 18

uses a single number, so in that context, we want 19

to boil it down to the annual usage and the 20

dollars. So, it seems to me that the status quo 21

makes sense. So can the DOE NOPR support that, 22

including specific combination of numbers that each 23

group would use to get those three results: 24

standby, on mode, and annual. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 222 MR. PETROLATI: What was the third? 1

Standby, o n mode and? 2

MR. FAIRHURST: Annual. 3

MR. PETROLATI: Jon , I don’t have an 4

answer right now, we’ll check. My concern is just 5

publishing the annual metric may eliminate some of 6

the agencies that use or establish requirements on 7

some of the other metrics. But obviously there’s 8

already the information within the single metric 9

that can be pulled out for determining some of 10

these other factors that you’re indicating. But 11

either way, we will check. 12

MR. FAIRHURST: Very good. 13

MR. BROOKMAN: That is the la st 14

substantive slide. As we had promised first thing 15

this morning

– thank you

– now is an opportunity 16

for anybody that wishes to, to make additional 17

comments, raise additional issues, anything you 18

don’t think has been covered sufficiently during 19

the cours e of this meeting. 20

I’m going to hand out an evaluation form 21

while this is taking place. Comments here as we 22

move towards closure? Yes, Bill. 23

MR. SCHLINDER: I just have a 24

clarification question on the very last issue. 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 223 Does that mean that if the test only specifies 1

perhaps an AEC, annual energy consumption value, 2

that other regulating agencies like Energy Star 3

would then adopt that as their requirement? 4

MR. PETROLATI: That’s correct, Bill, that 5

is the assumption here, that that would be the only 6

thi ng that they would be able to use, because that 7

is the only metric that comes out of the test 8

procedure, and we are going to have to work very 9

closely with the Office of General Counsel to see 10

if there’s any flexibility if we use the annual 11

metric for othe rs to use other aspects in terms of 12

establishing requirements. But the initial reading 13

was no, that they would be stuck with just the 14

annual metric. 15

MR. SCHLINDER: Thank you. 16

MR. BROOKMAN: Issues? Closing remarks at 17

this time? Yes, Bill. 18

**Closing Comments**  19

MR. SCHLINDER: Because this is so new to 20

me, I haven’t realized about the CEC being a 21

possibility, the only thing I can see with it is 22

that because it specifies seven hours of on time 23

versus five hours which has been the norm, then 24

these FTC ye llow labels that are basically annual 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 224 energy consumption, will go up by 40 percent. Five 1

to seven. And so if there’s two TVs for a while at 2

some of the retailers, one using one method and one 3

using a new method, there’ll be a 40 percent 4

differential whic h may

– it may be the exact same 5

power, but one’s being multiplied by seven versus 6

five, so that’s just a management issue, perhaps. 7

MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie. 8

MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens. I was 9

under the impression that in the absence of data 10

that w ould suggest otherwise, that you end up at 11

five and a half hours, not seven. Am I wrong on 12

that then? The seven was for primary televisions 13

only, right? 14

MR. BROOKMAN: Louis. Please. 15

MR. DESROCHES: So Louis, LBL. The seven 16

hours is the most concre te robust number, and the 17

five and a half is a bit of an approximation, so if 18

you have suggestions or concerns about the use of 19

either of those numbers, we would appreciate any 20

comments on that. But at the time it’s seven 21

hours. 22

MR. PETROLATI: Let me a lso clarify that 23

since we have seven in our formula, that 24

corresponds to strictly the value for primary 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 225 televisions at this point. 1

MR. DESROCHES: That’s correct. 2

MR. PETROLATI: And we are certainly 3

willing to accept comments concerning the approach. 4

MR. STEPHENS: Okay, we will

– we may

– 5

we’ll have our data based on television make and 6

model, which I guess can be traced back to year, so 7

we may find out that on average, we may agree with 8

you that 65 percent of the new televisions bought 9

end up as pr imary, and 35 percent end up as 10

secondary. If we do, I would think you would use 11

that same blended number of five and a half hours. 12

MR. BROOKMAN: Louis. 13

MR. PETROLATI: Please provide us a 14

comment along those lines, Charlie. 15

MR. STEPHENS: I hope t o provide data and 16

comment. 17

MR. DESROCHES: Just clarification. The 18

issue is not on the energy use of the televisions 19

that are already in stock. It’s the energy use of 20

the televisions that are being sold today, and so 21

what is the likelihood of a new te levision today 22

that will be a primary television, and that’s what 23

we don’t have the data to determine. 24

MR. STEPHENS: Yeah, that’s true. I 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 226 understand that, but ultimately the televisions

– 1

we’re looking at annual energy use and we’re not 2

just looking at annual energy use next year. We’re 3

looking at annual energy use of the television over 4

its lifetime, and a primary television ultimately 5

will become a secondary television, and, you know, 6

they rotate through the house as the oldest ones 7

leave and everyth ing moves. So I don’t know that 8

the rationale is as clear cut as you’re suggesting. 9

MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks. So additional 10

comments? Final comments? 11

So then for my part I’ll thank all of you. 12

We had a very productive day. We’ve covered a lot 13

of grou nd here, a lot of really, really good 14

commentary. Many thanks for that. I’ll turn it 15

back to Vic Petrolati to close it up. 16

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, thanks Doug. Again, 17

last slide we’ve got today

– I don’t want to see 18

any more

– Comments. Comment period c loses April 19

3 rd . We appreciate both your participating in this 20

meeting. We’re going to appreciate more receiving 21

comments from all stakeholders involved in this 22

process. So please get your comments in in a 23

timely fashion so we can move forward in a time ly 24

fashion. And again, we’ve got all the information 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 227 on either our website or in these viewgraphs as to 1

how to submit comments. 2

Second, thank you very much for your time. 3

It has been very helpful for us, getting this type 4

of information and feedback. Again, the comments 5

that we got for the RFI provided us a significant 6

basis for moving forward. These comments will 7

provide us a significant basis for finalizing this 8

test procedure. So, thank you again for your time 9

here today, and we appreciate the tim e and effort 10

you’re going to spend in submitting those comments. 11

I want to thank those on the web as well 12

for participating. Any final questions? Yes? 13

PARTICIPANT: (off mic) The presentation 14

will be posted on the website? 15

MR. PETROLATI: Yes, it was, days ago. 16

PARTICIPANT: And will be available? 17

MR. PETROLATI: Yes. 18

MR. BROOKMAN: All the materials will be 19

available on line? 20

MR. PETROLATI: Yes. 21

MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks to all of you. Safe 22

travels. 23

MR. PETROLATI: Yes. Okay. Thank you. 24

(Whereupon, at 3:48 p.m., the meeting in 25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 228 the above captioned matter was adjourned.) 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25Executive Court Reporters (301) 565

- 0064 229 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the attached proceedings

before:

**DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL COAL COUNCIL** 

In the Matter of:

**NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING**

**PUBLIC MEETING ON TELEVISION SETS**

Were held as herein appears and that this is the

original transcript thereof for the file of the

Department, Commission, Board, Administrative Law

Judge or the Agency.

Further, I am neither counsel for or related to

any party to the above proceedings.



### Wendy Greene Official Reporter

Dated: April 10, 2012